ity
a
)
a
.
oor
*,
i
2 FR a Saat
Tet
ed
THE
WILTSHIRE
Archeological ont Hatueal Aistory
MAGAZINE,
Publishex unter the Wirection of the Suctety
FORMED IN THAT COUNTY, A.D. 1853.
VOL. XVII.
DEVIZES:
H. F. & E. BULL, 4, Sarnt Joun SrREet. -
/ £)) ~ 1878.
DEVIZES +
PRINTED BY U. F. & E. BULL,
ST. JOHN STREET.
CONTENTS OF VOL. XVII.
No. XLIX.
Account of the Twenty-Third Annual Meeting, at Salisbury.............06
On a Leaden “Bulla” found at Warminster: Communicated by the
SAID A ESATO INT A. 5 Vices cantor tro danioyncans «xqimapvensaescgp eine as
Amye Robsart: By the Rev. Canon J. HE. Jackson, F.S.A..........cecuee
Letters Patent of Edward IV.: Communicated by James Hussey, Esq.
_ On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds in the Neigh-
bourhood of Salisbury: By the Rev. ArrHur P. Morrss, Vicar of
Britford
ss
:
Emme Ree REE eR H REET HE EEE HEHE EES EEE ES HSE O OHHH HOO E HHS E REESE
No. L.
The Ancient Roof Painting in Salisbury Cathedral: By the Rev.
MucGantor ARMETELD, MiuALg HSA. -c.cccsissiereadeencsccedicavacecsvevcvee
On the Original Position of the High Altar at Salisbury Cathedral : By
the Rev. Canon W. H. Jonzs, M.A., F.S.A., Vicar of Bradford-on-
MENS Shoat Ue hay MMT shes oe Ge Cate saicoaw ees oes 8 ona cn
_ Stonehenge: the Petrology of its Stones: By Nevin Srory MasKELYNE,
rm Dee se Neill va eee abe gacwudeticbadeease. sareiet ctetewevavoees
The Bishops of Old Sarum, A.D. 1075—1225: By the Rev. Canon W.
H. Jonzs, M.A., F.S.A., Vicar of Bradford-on-AVon......cccccccccceeeue
“The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire:” By W. W. Ravenuitt,
Esq., M.A., Honorary Secretary of the Wiltshire Society (founded
A.D. 1817), Recorder of Andover, &. .......0...0....c.0ccsecscuscesecccnees
Memoirs of the Rev. John Wilkinson and George Matcham, Esq.: By
Memthe Rey. Canon J.B. Jacwson, FSA. oo... ..ccsccccccccvercecteccecccese
Downton and Britford Churches: By C. H. Tatport, Esq. ..........0000-
_ Supposed Stone Circle near Abury: By the Rev. A. C. SurrH
seen eennenes
PAGE
127
129
136
147
161
192
234
238
253
iv CONTENTS OF VOL. XVII.
No. LI.
Account of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting at Warminster .........
The Vale of Warminster: By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.S.A. .........
Some Account of the Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin: By
the Rev. A. C. SMITH, Saale Je declenagte nok or one Weetre ce deasas vasonr aera nee
“ Abury Notes: By Witt1aM Lone, Esq., "M. AC; HSsAC see ei
On the Study of Anglo-Saxon and its Value to the Archzologist: By
the Rev. J. Baron, “MLA. Rector of Upton Scudamore ...............008
Architectural Notes on some of the Buildings visited by the Society,
during the late Warminster Meeting, August 22nd, 23rd, and 24th,
1877: By (CoH y DAnBOT, PSs agaeateaesse hassces ores anvecs cane
“The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire:” By W. W. RavENuILL,
Esq., M.A., Honorary Secretary of the Wiltshire Society (founded
1917), Be. sarccee oe Se IT nee is
[llustrations.
255
282
306
327
336
347
364
Leaden Bulla found at Warminster, 45. Fuc-simile of letter from Amye
(Robsart) Lady Dudley, 61. Fuac-simile of Amye, Lady Dudley’s letter to
her Taylor, 66.
Ground-plan of Salisbury Cathedral, 138. Elevation at ¢ on plan, 141.
Micro-
scope sections in illustration of the Petrology of the Stones at Stonehenge, 160.
Saxon Arch, Britford Church, Wilts, 248.
Museum Building Bund,
SUBSCRIPTION LIST.
£
Ailesbury, The Bare of 50
Alexander, G. 10
Anstie, T. B. yeeee
Awdry, Rev. E. C. eae |
Awdry, H. G. irtiay |
Awdry, J. W. 1
Awdry, West 1
Baron, Rev. J. 0
Barrey, H. G. 1
Bateson, Sir T. Bart., UZ. P. 25
Bennett, J.Jd., HM. D. af Ades
Bleeck, C. 2
Bouverie, TheRt.Hon.E. P. 25
Brewin, R.
Brine, J.B. 1
Britton, Mrs. 5)
Brown, G. gage ail
ditto (second Hah Sa. 0
Brown, H. Ae
Butcher, W. H. 3
Bull, H. F. & E. 2
Calley, Major 3
Chamberlaine, Rev. W. js a
Cholmeley, Rey. C. H. 0
Clark, Major 5
Clarke, H. M. 2
Clark, R. 3
ditto (second sub.) .., 1
Clarke, W. A. ‘hpsesee
Colston, Mrs. L. R. .. 10
Colwell, J. 1
Conolly, C. J. F. 5
Coward, R. 1
Cornthwaite, Rev. F. 1
Crowdy, Rev. A. 1
ditto (second sub.) 1
1
—
ditto (third sub.) Bg.
Cunnington, W. Jp: 20
ditto (second sub.) ... 10
Cunnington, H. SO.
Carried Forward £216
8.
e bo
wNwoodrcNONCTOrFS a)
i
=
Ve) cooocoOorororOoONrFwoocors
coccoosoo™
oqoqoomoococoeooooa
i) ooooocooocooooocoooooaoo
Brought Forward £216 9
Day, W. .. 11:13
Dixon, S. B. th oth
Dodd, ‘S: pri eg!
Dowding, Rev. W. .. 010
Edgell, Rev. E. B. 2 2
Estcourt, The Right Hon.
T. HS. Sotheron ... 50 0
Everett, Rev. E. Ne 2 2
Kyre, G. B. Soles ale
Ewart, Miss M. 5 0
Fitzmaurice, Lord E.,4.P.10 0
Flower, T. B. 5 0
Fowle, Miss a Dey
Fuller, J.B. 1200
Fuller, G. P. as AO 10
Goddard, A. L., U.P. 5 0
ditto (second sub, ) 5 0
Goddard, H. N. . 6 0
Goddard, Rey. F. 5 2 30
Goldney, F, H. 5.5
Griffith, C. Darby . 10 0
Grove, Miss Chafyn 20 0
Gwatkin, J. RB. 3.3
Haden, J. P. a. 9
Haleombe, John 5 0
Hall, Capt. Marshall .~2 10
Hamilton, Dean .10 0
ditto (second sub.) ... 5 O
Hayward, W. P. . 10 0
Heard, Rev. T. J. ee eee
Heneage, G. H. W. . 10 0
ditto (second sub.) 5 0
Heytesbury, Lord PLO (0
Holford, R. S. 8072.0
ditto (second sub.) . 5 0
Hony, Rev. C. W. 2 0
ditto (second sub.) 3.0
Hughes, Rey. J. H. a |
Hussey, J. 3 0
Carried Forward £485 12
ooooo
QOtl_oooococococoococooococoo ooococooco
li MUSEUM BUILDING FUND.
Brought Forward £485 1
Jackson, Rey. Canon 20
ditto (second sub.) . 20
ditto (third sub,) wu O
Jackson, J. 10
Kemble, Mrs. 2
Kemm, W. C. 2
ditto (second sub.) 1
Kemm, T. 1
Kenrick, Mrs. 2
Knight, Rey. J. 1
Lansdowne,TheMarquis of 50
Gitto (second sub.) ... 10
Leach, R. V. X20
Littlewood, Rey. S. Ad
Long, W. (W "rington) ... 5
ditto (second sub.) ... 5
Lowndes, E. C. 2 l2p
Lubbock, Sir J., U.P. ... 10
Lucas, C. R. See
Lyall, J. +. 20
Mackay, Alexander , £0
Mannings, G. eae
McNiven, Rey. C. Hee
ditto (second sub.) sp
Medlicott, H. E. fe
Meek, A. . 20
M eek, A. G. 2
Merewether, H. A., Q. C. 10
Merriman, W. C. roe
Merriman, kK. cay oe
Meyrick, Rev. E. Se
Mullings, R. ane ALO
Neeld, Sir John ... 50
Nightingale, J. E. ren tees
Nott, W. ree
Olivier, Rey, H. A, <r 10
Parfitt, Rey. Dr. ba 3
Parry, J. eel
Peace, Key. P. 1
Peacock, Rey. E. werd
Penruddocke, C. H. ... 20
Phipps, C. P. J ekO
Carried Forward £856
2
oooso
CSCORPOCONONOCONSO cooooorooco ooocoo
Nooo
6
oooonm
oooocs
qoocoocooco
ooooocooocooooo
ooo
Brought Forward £856
Plenderleath, Rev. W. C.
Powell, Walter, M.P.
Poynder, TA. Ac
Poynder, W. H.
ditto (second sub.)
Preston, Rey. T. A,
Price, R. E.
Prior, Dit Cte Ne
ditto (second sub.)
Ravenbill, W. W.
Ravenshaw. Rey. T. F. T.
Rutter, J. F.
Scrope, G. Poulett
Seymour, A.
Sladen, Rev. E. H. M.
Smith, Rev. A.
ditto (second sub.)
Smith, Rey. A. C.
ditto (second sub.)
Spicer Major
Stanton, Ven. Archdeacon
Stancomb, J.
Stancomb, W.
Stokes, D. J.
Soames, Rev. C.
ditto (second sub.)
Talbot, C.‘H.
ditto (second sub.)
Taylor, C.
Taylor, 8S. W.
Thurnam, Dr.
Walmesley, Richard
Waylen, R..F.
Wayte, Rev. W.
ditto (second sub.)
Weaver, H.
Weller, Mrs, Mary
Wellesley, Lady Charles
Whinfield, Rey. E. T.
Wilkinson, Rev. J.
Wilkinson, Rev. M., D. D.
Wilson, J.
Wyatt, Sir M. Digby
Wyatt, T. H.
Wyld, Rey. W. T.
6
Bail
5 0
50 0
. 26 0
50 0
2 2
1 0
10 0
20 0
2 2
5 0
hs
. 50 0
; 10 0
2 2
5 0
2 U
5 0
2 0
50 0
10 0
a= @.
.10 0
2 2
Tal
2 2
. alors
| ee oa
coe ae |
. 25 0
, 200
» LOO
ag!
5 0
2 2
5.6
5 0
10 0
56 0
et
1 coal
2 2
5.6
5 0
2 2
£1283 19
ooo eoeoooooooon
oooco ecoocooooeoeooeco9
olocooococqcocecececoeo
Feist of Geembers.
Life Members.
Ailesbury, the Most Hon. the Marquis
of, K.G., Savernake Forest, Marl-
borough
Awdry, Sir John Wither, Notton
House, Chippenham
Bruce, Lord Charles, M.P., Wilton
House, Eaton Square, London
Clarke, Henry M., 25, Mount St.,
Grosvenor Square, ‘London.
Clutterbuck, Rev.Canon Henry,M.A.,
Buckland Dinham, Frome
Duke, Rev. Edward, Lake House,
Salisbury
Ellis, Rev. J. H., Stourton Rectory,
Bath
Fitzmaurice, Lord E., M.P., Bowood
Grove, Sir Thomas Fraser, Bart.,
Ferne, Salisbury
Hoare, Sir Henry A., Bart., Stour-
head
Holford, R. S., Weston Birt, Tetbury
Jackson, Rev. Canon, Leigh Dela-
mere, Chippenham
Annual
Adderly Library, Marlborough Col-
lege, Librarian of
Alexander, G., Westrop House,
Highworth
Anstice, Rev. J. B., The Vicarage,
_ Hungerford
Anstie, G. W., Park Dale, Devizes
Anstie, T. B., Devizes
Archer, Col. D., Fairford House,
Gloucestershire
Arundell, of Wardour, The Rt. Hon.
Lord, Wardour Castle, Tisbury,
' Salisbury
Arney, Sir G. A., Hanover Square
Club, London
Astley, H. E., Hungerford
Awdry, Rev. E. C., Kington St.
Michael, Chippenham
Awdry, H. Goddard, Notton, Chip-
penham
Awdry, Justly W., Melksham
Lansdowne, The Most Hon. The
Marquis of, Bowood, Calne
Lowndes, E. C., Castle Combe, Chip-
penham
Lubbock, Sir J. W., Bart., M.P., 15,
Lombard Street, London, E.C.
Morrison,George, Hampworth Lodge,
Downton
Neeld, Sir John, Bart., Grittleton,
Chippenham
Nisbet, R. P., Southbroom, Devizes
Penruddocke, C., Compton Park,
Salisbury [Corsham
Poynder, W. H., Hartham Park,
Prior, Dr. R. C. A., 48, York Terrace,
Regent’s Park, London
Selfe, H., Marten, Great Bedwyn
Shaftesbury, The Rt. Hon the Earl
of, St. Giles’s, Cranbourne
Walmesley, Kichard, Lucknam,
Chippenham
Wellesley, Lady Charles, Conholt
Park, Andover
Subscribers.
Awdry, West, Monkton, Chippenham
Awary, Rev. William, St. John’s
College, Hurstpierpoint
Baker, T. H., Mere, Bath
Banks, Mrs. G. Linnezus, 82, Green-
wood Road, Dalston, London
Banting, Rev. W. B., Newbury
Barnwell, Rev. E. L., Melksham
Barrett, 5S. B. C., Pewsey
Baron, Rey. J., The Rectory, Upton
Scudamore, Warminster
Barrey, H. G., Devizes
Bateson, Sir T., Bart., M.P., 12,
Grosvenor Place, London, S.W.
Bath, The Most Hon. The Marquis
of, Longleat, Warminster
Bathurst, Sir F. H. dH., Bart.,
Clarendon Park, Salisbury
Batten, John, Aldon, Yeovil
Bennett, Rev. Canon F., Shrewton
Bennett, F.J.,M.D., Wilton, Salisbury
‘Vv LIST OF MEMBERS.
Bethell, S., The Green, Calne
Bingham, Rev. W. P. S., Berwick
Bassett, Swindon
Blackmore, Dr. H. P., Salisbury
Blackmore, William, Founder’s
Court, Lothbury, London
Blake, F. A., 39, Market Place,
Salisbury
Bleeck, C., Warminster
Bolam, C. G., Savernake Forest,
Marlborough
Bouverie, The Rt. Hon. EH. P.,
Market Lavington
Brackstone, R. H., Lyncombe Hill,
Bath
Bradford, R., Midge Hall, Wootton
Bassett
Brewin, Robert, Cirencester
Brine, J. E., Rowlands, Wimborne
Britton, Mrs. Helen, 39, Croydon
Grove, West Croydon, Surrey
Brown, George, Avebury
Brown, H., Blacklands Park, Calne
Brown, James, South View, London
Road, Salisbury
Brown, Henry, Salisbury
Brown, John, Manor Farm, Pewsey
Brown, W., iairview, Devizes
Brown, W. R., Highfield, Trow-
bridge
Brown, T. P., Burderop, Swindon
Bruges, H. Ludlow, Seend, Melksham
Buchanan, Ven. Arch., Potterne
Buckley, Alfred, New Hall, Salisbury
Buckley, Rev. J., Sopworth Rectory,
Chippenham
Bull, Messrs., Devizes
Caillard, C. F. D., Wingfield, Trow-
bridge
Calley, Major, Burderop, Swindon
Carey, Rey. T., Fifield Bavant,
Salisbury
Carless, Dr. E. N., Devizes
Chamberlaine, Rev. W. H., Keevil
_ Chandler, Thomas, jun., Devizes
Chandler, W., Aldbourne, Hunger-
ford
Cholmeley, Rev. C. Humphrey,
Dinton Rectory, Salisbury
Clark, Robert, Prospect House,
Devizes
Clark, T,, Trowbridge
Clarke, W. A., Chipperham
Cleather, Key. G. E., The Vicarage,
Cherrington, Devizes
Clifford, Hon. and Rt. Rey. Bishop,
Bishop’s House, Clifton, Bristol
Colbourne, Miss, Venetian House,
Clevedon
Colfox, Thomas W., Rax, Bridport,
Dorset
Colston, Mrs,, Roundway Park, Devizes
Colwell, J., Devizes
Cosway, Rev. 8., Chute, Andover
Coward, Richard, Roundway, Devizes
Cowley, The Rt. Hon. Karl, K.G.,
Draycot Park, Chippenham
Cresswell, W. H., Pinckney Park,
Malmesbury
Crowdy, Rev. Anthony, Titsey Rec-
tory, Redhill, Surrey
Cunnington, H., Devizes
Cunnington, William, Argyll House,
361, Cold-Harbour Lane, Brixton,
London, S.W.
Cunnington, W., jun., 57, Wiltshire
Road, Brixton, London, 8.W.
Daniell, Rev. J. J., Winterbourne
Stoke, Salisbury :
Daubeny, Kev. John, Theological
College, Salisbury
Day, W., Devizes
Dear, George, Codford St. Peter, Bath
Dixon, 8. B., Pewsey
Dodd, Samuel, 27, Kentish Town
Road, London, N.W.
Dowding, Rev. W., Idmiston, Salis-
bury
Duke, Rev. H. H., B.A., Westbury
Dyke, Rev. W., Bagenden Rectory,
Cirencester
Eddrup, Rev. Canon E. P., Bremhill,
Calne { Warminster
Eden, The Hon. Miss., Chapmanslade,
Edgell, Rev. #. B., Browham, Chip-
penham
Edmonds, R. S., Swindon
Edwards, Job, Amesbury
Elwell, Rev. W. E., 49, Sussex
Square, brighton
LIST OF MEMBERS. Vv
Errington, Most Rev. Archbishop,
Prior Park, Bath
Estcourt, G. T. J. Sotheron, M.P.,
Estcourt, Tetbury
Estcourt, Rev. W. J. B., Long
Newnton, Tetbury
Everett, Rev. E., Manningford Ab-
botts
Ewart, Miss M., Broadleas, Devizes
Eyres, Edwin, Lacock, Chippenham
Eyre, G. E., The Warrens, Bram-
shaw, Lymington
Eyre, G. E. Briscoe, 59, Lowndes
Square, London, S.W.
Faweett, E.G., Ludgershall, Andover
Fisher, Major C. Hawkins, The Castle,
Stroud
Flower, T. B., 9, Beaufort Buildings
West, Bath
Forrester, William, Malmesbury
Fowle, T. Everrett, Chute Lodge,
Andover
Fowle, Miss, Market Lavington
Freke, A. D. Hussey, Hannington
Hall, Highworth
Fry, J. B., Swindon
Fuller, G. P., Neston Park, Corsham
Gaisford, William, Worton
Gidley, Rev. Lewis, St. Nicholas’
Hospital, Salisbury
Goddard, Ambrose L., M.P., Swindon
Goddard, Edward Hungerford, Hil-
marton, Calne
Goddard, Rey. F., Hilmarton, Calne
Goddard, H. Nelson, Clyffe Pypard
Manor, Wootton Bassett
Godwin, J. G., 76, Warwick Street,
London, 8. W.
Goldney, Gabriel, M.P., Beechfield,
Chippenham [penham
Goldney, F'. H., Rowden Hill, Chip-
Gooch, Sir Daniel, Bart., M.P.,
: Clewer Park, Windsor
Good, Dr. J., Wilton, Salisbury
Gordon, Hon, and Rey, Canon,
Salisbury
’
. Hitchcock,
Gore, Arthur, Melksham
Grant, Rev. A., Manningford Bruce
Graves, A. R., Charlton Ludwell,
Donhead St. Mary, Salisbury
Griffith, C. Darby, Padworth House,
Reading
Grindle, Rev. H. A. L., Devizes
Grose, Samuel, Melksham
Grove, Miss Chafyn, Zeals House,
Bath
Guise, Sir W., Bart., Elmore Court,
Gloucester
Haden, Joseph P., Hill View, Trow-
bridge
Halcomb, John, Chieveley, Newbury
Hall, Rev. Henry, Semley Rectory,
Shaftesbury
Hall, Capt. Marshall, New University
Club,St.JamesStreet, London,S. W.
Hanbury, Edgar, Eastrop Grange,
Highworth
Harris, Rey. H., Winterbourne Bas -
sett, Swindon
Hart, C. F., Devizes
Hartley, Rev. Alfred Octavius,
Steeple Ashton, Trowbridge
Hawkins, F. G@., Hordley House,
Ramsgate
Haynes, Richard, 4, Maze Hill, St.
Leonards-on-Sea
Haywood, T. B., Woodhatch Lodge,
Reigate
Heard, Rey. T. J., The Rectory,
Sherrington, Codford, Bath
Heytesbury, the Right Hon. Lord,
Heytesbury
Hicks, Rev. G. G., Little Somerford,
Chippenham
Highmore, Dr. N. J., Bradford-on-
Avon
Hill, Miss A., Asby Lodge, Carlton
Road, Putney, London, 8, W.
Hillier, W., Devizes
Dr. C., Fiddington,
Market Lavington
Hobhouse, Sir C. P., Bart., Monkton
Farleigh, Bradford-on-Avon
Hodgson, Rey. J. D., The Vicarage,
Great Bedwyn, Hungerford
Hony, Rey, C. W., Bishops Cannings
Horsell, W. B. C., The Marsh,
Wootton Bassett
vi LIST OF MEMBERS. :
Howlett, Rev. W., Devizes
Hughes, Rev. J. H., 57, Euston
Square, London, 8. W.
Hulbert, H. V., Devizes,
Hulse, Sir Edward, Bart., Breamore,
Hants
Humphries, A.R., Fernbank, Wootton
Bassett
Hussey, James, Salisbury
Hutchings, Rey. Canon R. S., M.A.,
Alderbury, Salisbury
Huyshe, Wentworth, 6, Pelham
Place, Brompton, London, 8.W.
Inman, Rey. E,, West Knoyle Rect-
ory, Bath
Jackson, Joseph, Devizes
Jenkinson, Sir George, Bart., M.P.,
Eastwood Park, Cirencester
Jennings, J. S. C., Abbey House,
Malmesbury
Jones, Rey. Canon W.H., Bradford-
on-Ayon
Jones, W. 8., Malmesbury
Kemble, Mrs., Cowbridge House,
Malmesbury
Kemm, Thomas, Avebury
Kemm, W. C., Amesbury
Kenrick, Mrs,, Seend Cottage, Seend,
Melksham
King, Rev. Bryan, Avebury
Kingdon, Rey. H. T., 71, Wells
Street, Cavendish Square, London
Kinneir, R., M.D., Sherborne
Kinneir. H., Redville, Swindon
Knight, Rey. J., Heytesbury, Bath
Lawson, R. de M., Trowbridge
Law, Rey. R. V., 4, Alfred Street,
‘Bath
Leach, R. V., Devizes Castle
Lewis, Harold, Herald Office, Bath
Liardet, Join E., broomfield House,
Deptford
Linton, Rey. George, Corsham
Littlewood, Rev. 8., Edington, West-
bury
Locke, F. A. §., Rowdeford, Devizes
Long, W. H., Rood Ashton, ‘Trow-
bridge
Long, Walter J., Preshaw House,
Bishops Waltham, Hants
Long, William, West Hay, Wring-
ton, Bristol
Lukis, Rey. W. C., Wath Rectory,
Ripon
Lyall, J., Blunsdon Abbey, High-
worth
Mackay, Alex., Trowbridge
Mackay, James, Trowbridge
Maclean, J. C., M.D., Swindon
Malet, Sir A., Bart., K.€.B., 19,
Queensbury Road, London, S.W.
Mann, William J., Trowbridge
Marlborough College Nat. Hist
Society, The President of
Maskelyne, E. Story, Bassett Down
House, Swindon
Maskelyne, N. Story, F.R.S., 112,
Gloucester Terrace, Hyde Park
Gardens, London, W.
Master, Rev. G. 8., West Dean,
Salisbury
Matcham, William E., New House,
Salisbury
MeNiven, Rev. C. M., Perrystield
Godstone, Surrey
Medlicott, H. E., Sandfield, Potterne
Meek, A., Hillworth, Devizes
Meek, A. Grant, The Ark, Devizes
Merriman, E. B., Marlborough
Merriman, R. W., Marlborough
Merriman, 8. B., Philip Lane, Tot-
fenham, Middlesex
Methuen, Right Hon. Lord, Corsham
Court
Miles, Col. C. W., Burton Hill,
Malmesbury
Miles, E. P., Earlwood, near Bagshot
Miles, J., Wexcombe; Great Bedwyn,
Marlborough
LIST OF MEMBERS. Vil
Money, Walter, Herborough House,
Newbury
Morrice, Kev. Canon W. D., St.
Thomas’s Vicarage, Salisbury
Morgan, W. F., Warminster
Moulton, S., Kingston House, Brad-
tord-on-Avon
Mallings, Richard 8., Devizes
Musselwhite, John, Worton
Nelson, Right Hon. Earl, Trafalgar,
‘Salisbury
Nelson, Lady, Trafalgar, Salisbury
Nightingale, J. E., Wilton
Nott, William, Devizes
Noyes, George, 8, Worcester'Gardens,
Sutton, Surrey
Noyes, John,Cook Street, Chippenham
Olivier, Rev. Canon Dacres, Wilton,
Salisbury
Olivier, Rev. H. A., Poulshot,
Devizes
Ottley, Rey. G. L., Luckington Rec-
tory, Chippenham
t
Palmer, George W., Trowbridge
Parfitt, Rt. Rev. Dr., Cottles, Melk-
_ sham
Parish, Colonel,C.B., Conock, Devizes
Parry, Joseph, Allington, Devizes
Parsons, W.F., Hunt’s Mill, Wootton
Bassett
Peacock, Rey. E., Stone Hall, Haver-
.fordwest
Pearman, W.J., Devizes
Peill, Rey, J. N., Newton Toney, -
Salisbury
Penraddocke, Rey. J. H., South
Newton Vicarage, Wilton
Perry Keene, Col., Minety House,
Malmesbury
Petman, A: P.,. Wootton Bassett
Philipps, Rev. Canon Sir J. E., War-
minster
Phillips, Jacob, Chippenham
Phipps, Charles Paul, Chalcot, West-
ur
Plenderleath, Rev. W. C., Cherhill
Rectory, Calne
Powell, Mrs. M. E. Vere Booth,
Hurdcott House, Salisbury
Powell, W., M.P., Eastcourt House,
Malmesbury
Preston, Rev. T. A., Marlborough
College
Price, R. E., Middle Hill, Box, Chip-
penham
Proctor, W., Elmhurst, Higher Erith
Road, Torquay
Prower, Major, Purton
Wootton Bassett
House,
Radcliffe, C. H., Salisbury
Randell, J. A.,, Devizes
Randell, J. S., Rudloe Lodge, Cor-
sham
Ravenbill, W. W., 5, Fig Tree Court,
Temple, London, E.C.
Ravenshaw, Key. T. F. T., Pewsey
Read, C. J., St. Thomas’s Square,
Salisbury
Rendell, W., Devizes
Reynolds, Stephen, Devizes
Richardson, Rev. H., M.A., Devizes
Richmond, George, R.A., Potterne
Rigden, R. H., Salisbury
Rogers, Walter Lacy, 32, Onslow
Square, London, 8. W.
Rolls, John Allan, The Hendre,
Monmouth
Rumming, Thomas, Red House,
‘Amesbury, Salisbury
Rutter, J. F., Mere, Bath
Rutter, John K., Mere, Bath
Sadler, S. C., Purton Court, Swindon
Sainsbury, Capt. C. H.S., Bathford,
Bath
Salisbury, The-Right Rev. The Lord
Bishop of, The Palace, Salisbury
Vill LIST OF MEMBERS.
Salisbury, The Very Rev. The Dean
of, The Close, Salisbury
Saunders, I. Bush,Bradford-on-Avon
Schomberg, Arthur, Seend, Melksham
Seymour, A., Knoyle House, Hindon
Shopland, James k.,Purton, Swindon
Simpson, George, Devizes
Skrine, H. D,, Warleigh Manor,
Bath
Sladen, Rev. E. H. M., The Gore,
Bournemouth
Sloper, Edwin, Taunton
Sloper, G. E., Devizes
Sloper, 8. W., Devizes
Smith, Rev. A. C., Yatesbury, Calne
Smith, J. A., Market Place, Devizes
Soames, Rey. C., Mildenhall, Marl-
borough
Southby, Dr. A., Bulford, Amesbury
Spencer, J., Bowood
Spicer, J. W. G., Spye Park, Chip-
penham
Stallard, Rev. G., Grafton Vicarage,
Marlborough
Stancomb, J. Perkins, The Prospect,
Trowbridge
Stancomb, W., Blount’s Court, Pot-
terne ‘
Stanton, Rev. J. J., Tockenham
Rectory, Wootton Bassett
Staples, T. H., Belmont, Salisbury
Stevens, E. T., 19, Minster Street,
Salisbury
Stevens, Joseph, St. Mary Bourne,
Andover
Stokes, D. J., Rowden Hill, Chip-
penham
Stokes, Robert, Salisbury
Stratton, Alfred, Rushall
Stratton, Frederick, St. Joan a Gore,
Devizes
Stratton, William, Kingston Deverill,
Warminster
Strong, Rev. A., St. Paul’s Rectory,
Chippenham
Swayne, H. J. F., The Island, Wilton,
Salisbury
Tait, E. 8., 54, Highbury Park,
London, N.
Talbot, C. H., Lacock Abbey, Chip-
penham
Taylor, C., Lovemead House, Trow-
bridge
Taylor, S. W., Erlestoke Park,
Devizes
Thynne, Rey. A.B., Seend,Melksham
Toppin, Rev. G. Pilgrim, Broad Town
Vicarage, Wootton Bassett
Tordiffe, Rey. Stafford, Devizes
Wakeman, Herbert J., Warminster
Walker, Rey. R. Z., Boyton Rectory,
Bath
Ward, Rev. H., Aldwincle, near
Thrapston
Ward, Col.M.F.,Greenham, Newbury
Warre, Rey. Canon F., Monks Park,
Corsham
Waylen, G. 8. A., Devizes
Waylen, K. F., Admiralty, White-
hall, London, 8S.W.
Wayte, Rev. W., 2, Cambridge
Terrace, Regent’s Park, London,
N.W.
Weaver, Henry, Devizes
Weller. Mrs. T., 22, Tamworth Road,
Croydon, Surrey
Whintield, Rey. E. T., Woodleigh,
Bradford-on-Ayon
Whitby, Rev. R. V., The Vicarage,
Lechlade
Wilson, J., M.A., Chippenham
Winterscale, Capt. J. F. M., Great
Cheverell :
Wyld, Rev. C. N., Westbury
Wyld, Revy.Edwin G., Woodborough,
Marlborough
Wyndham, C. H., Wans, Chip-
penham
Yeatman, Rey. H. W., Netherbury,
Bridport
Yockney, A., Pockeridge, Corsham
Zillwood, F, W., Salisbury
THE
WILTSHIRE
Arrheologial and Batural Wrstory
MAGAZINE,
No. XLIX. MAY, 1877. Vou. XVII.
Contents.
Account oF THE TWENTY-THIRD ANNUAL MEETING, AT SALISBURY
On a Leapen “ Burta” Frounp aT WARMINSTER: Communicated
by the Rev. John Baron, M.A...........5. -eeeeeeeeees sloleslolatets
Amys Rozssart: By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A
Lerrers Parent or Epwarp IV.: Communicated by James Hussey,
HES. wc cccccccetesesens ceceseescsccs secece rere seccece
ON THE OCCURRENCE OF SOME OF THE RARER SPECIES OF BIRDS IN
THE NEIGHBOURHOOD oF SaLispurgy: By the Rev. Arthur P.
Morres, Vicar of Britford .............. sleiate a
RECOLLECTIONS OF THE BUSTARD ON SALISBURY PLAIN ..eeeeeees
ILLUSTRATIONS,
Leaden Bulla found at Warminster ........+..e000- 45
Fac-simile of letter from Amye (Robsart) Lady Dudley 61
DEVIZES:
H. F, & E. BULL, 4, Sarnt Jonn SrReer,
PAGE,
127
ee * aly é “es ° q
> pad ! J)
eae ald ete ee =
heer Pie ares. beaeht Wale pag
ual to. Ce raitaee TW Sane
‘ Stings Weds fannl titel
couples | cogreay mdr: ratiet be sata
- —_
“i ox ee UAE 4
rupees. « ed
LBA aot
a
r
re . aaa
ee
as @#eeovsea
Sauce i =!
ir WOM)
“qe cag tare
eer
ins ~
wey ae: re
—.
WILTSHIRE MAGAZINE
‘‘ WULTORUM MANIBUS GRANDE LEVATUR ONUS.’’—Ovid.
THE TWENTY-THIRD ANNUAL MEETING
OF THE
Wiltshire Archeological & Natural Wistory Society,
HELD AT SALISBURY,
Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, August 23rd, 2Ath, and 25th,
1876.
PRESIDENT OF THE MEETING,
Siz Jonn Lupzocx, Bart., M.P., F.R.S., &., &c.
> Meeting of the Society this year! was attended bya larger
0
number of Members than on any previous occasion, attracted
ubtless in part by the charms of the Cathedral city, and the pro-
verbial hospitality of its inhabitants; but still more (as we con-
fidently believe), by the desire, worthy of all true Archzologists, to
hear what would be said about Stonehenge and our Wiltshire monu-
ments of antiquity, by so renowned a leader in the archeological
world as Sir John Lubbock, and other gentlemen of note, who were
expected to be present. Nor did any return disappointed, for though
Stonehenge remains as great a mystery as ever, and is still, as here-
tofore, open to the theories of the imaginative; a great many
opinions (sometimes contradictory to one another) were delivered,
and much very interesting discussion ensued.
The Council Chamber having been placed at the disposal of the
Society by the kindness of the Mayor, the proceedings began at two
o'clock on Wednesday, August 23rd, under the presidency of Sir
1JIn preparing the following account of the Salisbury Meeting the Editor
desires to acknowledge the assistance he has derived from the columns of the
Sulisbury and Winchester Journal, and the Wiltshire County Mirror.
VOL. XVII.—NO. XLIX, B
2 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
John Lubbock; who at once called on Rev. A. C. Sura, one of
the Secretaries, to read
THE REPORT FOR 1876.
“The Committee of the Wiltshire Archzological and Natural
History Society desires to report to the Members the continued
prosperity of the Society, which, during the last twelvemonths, has
certainly suffered no diminution ; rather, it may be said, that in one
important particular, viz., in the literary department, it has achieved
a work of more than ordinary value, on which it has for a long time .
had its eye, as shall be more particularly mentioned presently.
“This has been a very heavy year of losses of old and valued
Members of the Society. On the 6th of January, of this year,
died Mr. Sotheron Estcourt, a name honoured in every household in
Wilts, and which will long continue to be cherished as that of one
who made himself beloved by all classes in the county, and not less
esteemed by this Society, whose third president he was, from the
year 1859 to 1862, and in which he took a keen and active interest
to the time of his decease, and to which he was frequently a liberal
donor. Perhaps it will not be out. of place if it is here recorded
what may be unknown to many, but should be made known to every
Member of the Society, that when part of the famous circle of
Avebury was threatened with profanation by the building of villas
within the area, and the destruction of some of the stones ; and when —
it was rescued from such threatened injury by the public spirit of
our now president—Sir John Lubbock—who came forward at the
right moment and purchased the land in question (as we mentioned
in the report for 1871), Mr. Sotheron Estcourt, who had heard
tidings of the intended desecration, but had not heard of the rescue,
hastened to write to your Secretary and give him full authority to
draw upon him for any sum he (the Secretary) might require in
order to purchase the land so threatened, and avert the injury con-
templated. This, however, is not the proper place for a memoir of
Mr. Estcourt, which will appear in its proper place in the forthcoming
number of the Magazine.! On the 19th of January (the same
1The memoir of Mr. Sotheron Estcourt and Mr, Poulett Scrope appeared in
the last No. of the Magazine, vol. xvi. p. 340.
Report for 1876. 3
month in which we lost Mr. Estcourt) died Mr. Poulett Scrope, the
first president of this Society, to whose diligence and zeal in the
cause our Society stands in great degree indebted for the position it
very early occupied in the county; and to whose kindly support and
unceasing interest in its welfare the Society owes a great deal of its
present firmly-rooted condition. A memoir of Mr. Scerope will also,
it is hoped, appear in the next Magazine. In addition to the loss
of these two early presidents of the Society, we have to lament that
of several other members who have been subscribers and supporters
of the Society from its foundation ; among whom we would mention
Mr. Howse, of St. Paul’s Churchyard, London ; Mr. Seymour, of
Crowood, Ramsbury; and more recently the Earl of Suffolk and
Mr. Tugwell, of Devizes, at whose house the Society has, on more
than one occasion, visited the fine collection of British birds (most
of them Wiltshire specimens) made by the late Mr. Warriner, of
Conock. Although, however, the number of Members who have
passed away since last year is considerable, your Committee is happy
to add that there has been more than an equal number of admissions
to fill up the vacancies. The number of members now on the books,
which at the last general meeting was stated to be 340, now amounts
to 355. .
« Financially, the Society stands much as it did last year. While
expending in the prosecution of its objects the whole of its income,
it has still a small balance in hand as heretofore, but with the details
we need not now trouble you; they will appear in the balance sheet
in the next number of the Magazine.
“ And now we come to the Magazine, of which three numbers
have been issued since last autumn; viz., an ordinary number in
December and a double number a month ago, which last contains a
full account of Stonehenge and its barrows, the very able work of
Mr. William Long, to whom the Committee here desires to express
its very warmest thanks, and its sense of the great benefits he has
conferred on the Society. For many years past the Committee has
felt that it ought to put forth a treatise on Stonehenge which should
collect and embody and record all that was known of that world-
renowned monument; and for a long period overtures have been
B 2
4 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
made to Mr.. Long to try and induce that gentleman to do for
Stonehenge what he had so admirably done for Avebury. Mr.
Long, however, with a generous diffidence which all will appreciate,
declined, during Dr. Thurnam’s lifetime, to engage in a work which
he modestly thought that able antiquary would better carry out,
and it was not until after the lamented death of Dr. Thurnam, that
Mr. Long would suffer himself to be persuaded to take Stonehenge
in hand. How he has succeeded, how he has made copious use (as
he himself tells us in the outset of his work) of Dr. Thurnam’s
MSS., which were kindly placed at his disposal by Mrs. Thurnam,
how he arranged his materials, collected the scattered notices he has
culled from various sources, brought them all within a narrow com-
pass, and explained everything in detail, assisting the letterpress
with copious illustrations (all of which he has most generously pre-
sented to the Society), you can all judge for yourselves. Enough
for the Committee to state that since the publication of its magnum
opus, to wit Canon Jackson’s Aubrey, the Society’s press has neither
been engaged with more valuable material, nor has it published
anything of which it is more proud: and when Mr. Long modestly
suggested to the Editor of the Magazine that there should be
printed on the cover of the Stonehenge number a repudiation of all
responsibility on the part of the Society for the opinions contained
therein, your Editor felt no hesitation in accepting on the part of
the Society any share of responsibility, in hopes that by so doing
the Society might at the same time derive some portion of the credit
which such a work cannot fail to bring to all who have had any part
in it. So far for the literary work of the Society to the present
moment, though it should be added that No. 48, concluding volume
XVi., is in progress, and will, it is hoped, be in the hands of Members
in the course of the autumn ; and with that number will be published
an index to the last eight volumes (Canon Jackson having already
published an index to the first eight, of which he was Editor) ; and
for this last index we shall be indebted to the diligence of one of our
local Secretaries, the Rev. W. C. Plenderleath, Rector of Cherhill,
who has already prepared, so far as he can prepare, an index of a
work which is not yet quite completed.
“a.
ee a er 2
Report for 1876. 5
With regard to the Museum and Library of the Society at
Devizes, thanks to the zeal and activity of the Curators, large and
very valuable additions have been made since last year by purchase, not
only to the general collections of archzologieal treasures, and the
various departments of natural history, more especially in regard to
ornithology ; but by means of special subscriptions which they have
collected for the purpose, large table-cases, and other fittings have
been purchased, which have well nigh completed the furnishing of
the Society’s rooms.
‘Tt only remains to add to this report (which has been prolonged
to an unusual length, by an unwillingness to pass hurriedly over
subjects which deserved to be fully set before the Members) that
the work of the Society still craves your united and your individual
assistance; that there is a great deal to be done before we can be
said to have exhausted our subjects, both in the direction of the
archeology and of the natural history of our county ; and that it is
the earnest hope of the Committee that your efforts will not be re-
laxed, while so much on every side of you invites your careful research,
and so many things demand your protection, which, but for your
timely interference, would be irreparably injured, if not destroyed.”
On the motion of the Bisnop, seconded by the Mayor, the report
was adopted.
The Rev. A. C. Smiru then begged the attention of the meeting
for a few moments while he did justice to two gentlemen who de-
served well of the Archeological Society, their good old friend and
fellow-worker, Mr. Matcham, whose words had been most unin-
tentionally misquoted, and their excellent friend, Mr. Long, the
talented author of “Stonehenge and its Barrows,” to whom they
felt so deep a debt of gratitude ; and who desired to take the earliest
opportunity of correcting an error, into which he had been inadver-
tently led. Mr. Smith was sure the meeting would not grudge the
time occupied in setting this matter right, which he would do by
reading to them a letter he had received from Mr. Long. [This
letter was printed in the last number of the Magazine, vol. xvi.,
page 339.]
Tur PrestDENT, in proposing the election of General Secretaries
6 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
for the ensuing year, announced that Mr. Cunnington, as he had
now left Wiltshire and was residing in London, had expressed a
wish to retire from the office of Secretary, which he had held with
such benefit to the society for so many years. He was sure the
Members would very much regret the loss of his valuable services ;
moreover as a geologist he was well known over a far wider
area than Wiltshire. While however deploring the loss of Mr.
Cunnington’s services, he was glad to put before the meeting the
name of Mr. E. T. Stevens as his successor: Mr. Stevens had the
greatest sympathy with the work of the Society, and would, he was
sure, discharge the duties of the office in a highly satisfactory manner.
It would be presumptuous in him if he were to say one word further
in commendation of the name of so well known and able a worker
in the archeological field. He would content himself, therefore,
with simply proposing that the Rev. A. C. Smith, Mr. C. H. Talbot,
and Mr. E. T. Stevens be appointed the General Honorary Secretaries
for the year.
Mr. Cunntnerton felt the greatest possible pleasure in seconding
the proposition, Mr. Stevens having always been the very life of the
Society in the southern part of the county. His valuable services
were also well known, (and everywhere acknowledged and appre-
ciated), in connection with the Blackmore and South Wilts Mu-
seums. He himself deeply regretted that he was obliged to retire
from an office which he had held ever since the Society was estab-
lished in 1852; but his removal from Devizes to London necessitated
the adoption of such a step. He could not allow the present oppor-
tunity to pass without publicly expressing to the Members of the
Society his heartfelt thanks for the great kindness, indulgence and
assistance which he had invariably received at their hands. He
would only add that if he could, in any possible way, although
living in London, promote the interests of the Society, they might
always rely upon his services.
The proposition was unanimously carried.
The Rev. A. C. Smith said that they had a number of most ex-
cellent Vice-Presidents, but as several losses had been sustained
since the last annual meeting, he desired, in order to fill those
2 eae we eee
The Twenty-third General Meeting. 7
vacancies, to propose a few names for their acceptance as Vice-
Presidents ‘of the Society. He would first mention Mr. Goldney,
M.P. for Chippenham, who had presided over them for the last three
years, and in recognition of his services the least they could do was
to elect him a Vice-President. The second name on his list was
that of Mr. William Blackmore, the munificent founder of the
splendid Museum hard by, to whom the Society felt a special debt
of gratitude ; and the third name was that of his friend and colleague
for so many years—Mr. Cunnington. The loss of Mr. Cunnington
to the Society as Secretary was no common loss: it was not too
much to say that he was one of the chief founders of the Society,
and but for his exertions, the Society would perhaps never have
éome into existence: it was certainly the case that but for his energy
and perseverance a museum in connection with the Society would never
have been estublished at Devizes. But to himself individually the loss
of Mr. Cannington as a colleague was a most severe blow : they had
worked together in great harmony and with the greatest cordiality
for above twenty years, and he (Mr. Smith) could ill spare his ser-
vices. Not however that his work in connection with the Society
was ended: Mr. Cunnington would still, he felt sure, do work for
the Society in London, and by electing him a Vice-President, they
secured him as a member of the Committee. In proposing these
gentlemen to be added to the list of Vice-Presidents Mr. Smith
begged to move a special and most hearty vote of thanks to Mr.
Cunnington for the valuable services which he had rendered to the
Society from the day of its inauguration to the present time.
- The Rev. Presenpary Writxinson! seconded the proposition
most cordially, and spoke in the highest terms of praise of the im-
portant work which Mr. Cunnington had done for so many years
for the Society ; and he added that he had the authority of Mr.
Prestwich for saying that no geologist knew more of the strata of
1 Within ten days of the Salisbury Meeting, throughout which he accompanied
the Members, apparently in his usual health, and with his customary vivacity,
and the interest he always took in the proceedings, the Rey. John Wilkinson
breathed his last, to the great loss and regret of the Society, whose constant
friend and supporter he had been from the very first.
8 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
the earth in the West of England than did Mr. Cunnington. There
was another thing which might be mentioned ; he would remind the
meeting that Mr. Cunnington’s grandfather was associated with the
late Sir Richard Colt Hoare, in the preparation of his invaluable
history of Wiltshire.
The resolution having been put, and very warmly received and
carried, Mr. Cunnington expressed his thanks in brief but feeling
terms.
The Committee was then re-appointed, with certain additions :
the Local Secretaries and the Treasurer were re-elected ; and then
began
THE PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS.
Sm Joun Lussock said—When your excellent Secretary, Mr.
Smith, first communicated to me the wish of your Committee that
I should become your President for this year, I must confess that I
had some natural hesitation in accepting your very flattering in-
vitation. I have so recently become directly connected with the
county, there are so many gentlemen well qualified, not only to fill,
but to adorn, the office, that I could not but feel doubtful how far
the suggestion would be approved by, and advantageous to, the
Society. Nevertheless I have long felt so deep an interest in this,
the central, and archzologically, the richest district of England, I
am always so happy in the sunshine of your glorious downs, or
under the shadow of your beautiful cathedral, that I could not refuse
myself the pleasure, and, for it is never very difficult to convince
one’s self of what one wishes to believe, it seemed to me that the
responsibility of the selection would after all in no sense rest upon me.
It is indeed always a pleasure to come into Wiltshire, and much
more too thanamereidleone. I sometimes think that everyone—at
any rate every sehoolmaster and every Member of Parliament—ought
to make the tour of the county and visit its principal antiquities,
There are still many who go abroad to visit distant antiquities,
neglecting those at home, like the “ Wander Witt of Wiltshire,”
mentioned by Gibbons in 1670, who, having “ screwed ” himself into.
the company of some Roman antiquaries, confessed that he had
never seen Stonage, as he calls it, whereupon they kicked him out
The President’s Address. 9
of doors, and bad him goe home and see Stonage; and I wish,” adds
Gibbons, “all such Aisopicall cocks, as slight these admired stones,
and other our domestick monuments (by which they might be ad-
monished to eschew some evil and doe some good), and scrape for
barley cornes of vanity out of foreign dunghills, might be handled,
or rather footed, as he was.” Indeed, it would be difficult to finda
pleasanter or more instructive tour. The visitor would begin, per-
haps, with Marlborough, pass the large Castle Mound, and coming:
soon within sight of the grand hill of Silbury, leave the high-road,
and drive, partly up the ancient roadway, into the venerable circle of
Abury, perhaps the most interesting of our great national monu-
ments. There he would walk round the ancient vallum, he would
search out the remaining stones among the cottages and farmsteads,
and wonder at the ancient mechanical skill which could have moved
such ponderous masses, and at the modern barbarism which could
have destroyed such interesting, I might say, almost sacred, monu-
ments of the past. From Abury he would pass on across the great
wall of Wansdyke, which he would trace on each side of the road,
stretching away as far as the eye could reach, and sleep at the ancient
eity of Devizes. On Salisbury Plain he would visit Stonehenge,
the sanctity of which is attested, not only by its own evidence, but
by the tumuli which cluster reverently round it, and which have been
described in the last volume of the Archologia, by Dr. Thurnam,
whose recent death is so great a loss to science. At Old Sarum he
will, I must be forgiven for saying, for the first time come aeross
real and written history. Lastly, at Salisbury he will see one of
the most beautiful of Cathedrals, and an excellent Museum which we
owe to the liberality of Mr. Blackmore, while for the admirable
_ arrangement we are indebted to Mr. Stevens. The question natu-
-
rally arises, ‘To what age do these monuments belong?” ‘‘ When
and by whom were Stonehenge and Abury erected?” As regards
the latter, history is entirely silent. Stonehenge, with the exception
possibly of an allusion in Hecatzus, is unmentioned by any Greek
or Roman writer; nor is there any reference to it in Gildas, Nennius,
Bede, or in the Saxon Chronicle. Henry of Huntingdon, in the
twelfth century, alludes to it with admiration, but expresses no
10 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
opinion as to its date or origin. In the same century, Geoffrey of
Monmouth, who, in the words of Dr. Guest, “is everywhere found
darkening the pure light of our early history,” gave to the world
that which some call an historical account of Stonehenge, viz., that:
it was erected in the fifth century, to commemorate the treacherous
murder of the British by Hengist. The stones are said to have
come from Africa, whence they were transported by giants to the
plains of Kildare; and from thence by the enchantments of Merlin
carried to Salisbury Plain. The question has been well discussed
by one of our members, Mr. Long, in his recent work on “ Stonehenge
and its Barrows,” in which he has usefully brought together our
present information on the subject, and I will therefore only add
that, for my own part, I look upon the account given by Geoffrey
as altogether mythical. It is remarkable that the source of the
small inner stones, which, as Stukeley first pointed out, are of a
different material from the others, is still uncertain, but the large
ones are certainly “ Sarsen” stones, such as are still shown in many
places on the Plain. The best evidence as to the age of Stonehenge
seems to me derivable from the contents of the tumuli surrounding
it. Within a radius of three miles round Stonehenge there are no
less than three hundred tumuli; which is, I need not say, a much
larger number than are found anywhere else within an equal area.
We can hardly doubt, I think, that these tumuli cluster round the
great monument, or, at least, that the same circumstances which led
to the erection of Stonehenge on its present site, either directly or
“indirectly, led to the remarkable assemblage of tumuli round it.
Now, two hundred and fifty of these tumuli were opened by our
great antiquary, Sir Richard Colt Hoare, and are described in his
“ Ancient Wiltshire.” If these belonged to the past Roman period
we should naturally expect to find iron weapons, and, especially
knives, coins, well-burnt pottery, and other relics characteristic of
the period. Is this so? Not atall. The primary interment was
not in any case accompanied by objects of iron, while in no less than
thirty-nine cases bronze was present. We have then, I think, strong
grounds for referring these monuments to the Bronze Age; and
if this be true of Stonehenge, it probably is the case with Abury
The President’s Address. 11
also, which seems decidedly more archaic, the stones for instance
being rough, while those of Stonehenge are hewn. Now when was
the Bronze Age? -And what do archeologists mean by the Bronze
Age? I ask this question because, though it has been repeatedly
answered, there is still a great misapprehension even in the minds
of some who have written on the subject. By the Bronze Age, then
We mean a period when the weapons were made almost entirely, and
ornaments principally, of bronze; that is to say of copper and tin;
gold being rare, iron and silver still more so, or even unknown, as
was also the case with coins and glass. Some archeologists, indeed,
have considered that the bronze swords and daggers which characterise
the Bronze Age are really Roman. This question has been much
discussed, and I will not now enlarge on it, but will only say, that
in my judgment these arms are not found with Roman remains, and
that the Roman weapons were made of iron, the word “ ferrum ”
being synonymous with a sword. On this point, I have taken some
pains to ascertain the opinions of Italian archeologists. Bronze
swords, daggers, &c., occur south of the Alps, the very patterns
being in some places identical with those of Northern Europe. But
I believe it may be asserted that no object characteristic of the
Bronze Age has been found in a Roman tomb; none“have been met
with at Pompeii, and those Italian archeologists, whom I have been
able to consult, all agree that they are undeniably pre-Roman. If
indeed the bronze swords and daggers were of Roman origin, they
ought to be more numerous in Italy than in the north. Now what
are the facts? The museum of the Royal Irish Academy contains
no less than three hundred swords and daggers of bronze. As re-
gards other countries, M. Chantre, who has been collecting statistics
on the subject, has been good enough to inform me that the French
museums contain four hundred and nine, those of Sweden (including
poniards) four hundred and eighty, and of Denmark, six hundred,
while in Italy he knows of sixty only. These numbers seem to me
to militate very strongly against the views of those who would
ascribe these weapons to the Romans. When then was the Bronze
Age? We know that iron was known in the time of Homer, which
seems to have been, as regards the South of Europe, the period of
12 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
transition, from the age of iron to that of bronze. Inthe Pentateuch,
excluding Deuteronomy (which probably belongs to a much later
date) brass, that is to say bronze, is frequently mentioned, while
iron is only alluded to four times. Coins were first struck about
900 B.C., as it is generally said, by the Giginetans under Pheidon,
King of Argos, though Herodotus ascribes them to the Lydians.
It is true that the use of iron may have been known in Southern
Europe long before it was introduced in the north. On the whole,
however, I am disposed to think that when iron was once discovered,
its use would spread somewhat rapidly ; and the similarity of form,
of pattern, and of ornaments existing between the bronze arms and
implements throughout Europe, seems to negative the idea that
bronze was in use for such purposes in the north for any great length
of time after it had been replaced by iron in the south. It is how-
ever more than probable that many of our smaller Wiltshire tumuli
belong to a still earlier period, namely, to the Neolithic, or later
Stone Age, though it is not easy to say which of them doso. This
is probably also the case with the large chambered tumuli in which
as yet no metal has been discovered. As regards the Stone Age,
the same word of caution is necessary as in that of bronze. There
are still some who deny the very existence of such a period, alleging
generally as their reason against this proposed classification that
implements and weapons of stone were used in conjunction with
those of metal. This, however, no one denies. The characteristic
of the Stone Age is not the presence of stone, but the absence of
metal ; and if the name were to be a definition, the period would be
more correctly designated as non-metallic. That there was indeed
a time when stone axes, knives and javelin-heads were used in Europe,
and when metal was unknown, cannot I think be for a moment
doubted or denied by anyone who has carefully looked into the
evidence. These objects of stone, so well described by Mr. Evans
in his excellent work on the ancient stone implements of Great
Britain, are of the most varied character; mere flakes used as knives,
scrapers for preparing skins, axes, adzes, hammers, gouges, chisels,
arrow-heads, javelin-heads, swords, picks, awls, slingstones, and
many other forms; these too, found not singly or in small numbers,
The President’s Address. 13
but by hundreds and thousands, I might say tens of thousands,
attest the important part which has been played by stone in the
early stages of the development of the human race. For our know-
ledge of this period we are mainly indebted, firstly, to the shell-
mounds or refuse heaps of Denmark, so well studied by Steenstrup
and Worsaae; secondly, to the tumuli or burial mounds; thirdly,
to the remains found in caves; and fourthly, to the Swiss
lake dwellings, first made known to us by Keller, and after-
wards studied with so much zeal and ability by Morlot, Troyon,
Desor, Schwab, and other Swiss archeologists. From these
sources we get some idea of the conditions of life existing during
the Stone Age. The use of pottery was known, but the potter’s
wheel does not seem to have been as yet discovered. Man was
clothed in skins, but partly also, in all probability, in garments
made of flax. His food was derived principally from animals killed
in the chase, but he had probably domesticated the ox as well as the
goat, the pig and the dog; nor was he altogether ignorant of agri-
eulture. Traces of dwellings of this period have been found in
various parts of England; and in this county, the curious circular
depressions at Stourhead, known as the “ Pen Pits,” perhaps belong to
it. These dwellings seem to have consisted of pits sunk into the
ground, which were probably covered by a roof consisting of branches
of trees, over which again a coating of turf and earth may probably
have been placed. The Swiss lake dwellings of this period were
constructed on platforms supported on piles driven into the muddy
bottom of the lakes, and in some cases still further supported by
having stones heaped up round them. In one case a large canoe
has been met with, which was evidently wrecked while on its way
to one of the lake settlements, loaded with a freight of such stones.
It must be admitted, indeed, that our knowledge of the Stone Age
is still scanty, fragmentary, and unsatisfactory ; on the other hand,
the stone weapons and implements found in Europe so very closely
resemble those in use amongst various races of existing savages that
they give us vivid, and I think to a great extent accurate, ideas of
the mode of life which prevailed at that distant period; distant in-
deed it was, according to the ideas of chronology which almost
14 The Twenty-thind General Meeling.
universally prevailed until within the last quarter of a century, for
we can scarcely doubt that even the later Stone Age goes back to a
period more remote than the 6000 years which were traditionally
supposed to be the limit of man’s existence on earth. No doubt,
indeed, the difficulties of the received chronology had long been felt.
Well-marked varieties of the human race are shown by the Egyptian
monuments to have existed as early, at any rate, as the fifteenth
century before Christ. The antiquity of man is also indicated by
the differences of language and by the existence of powerful and
flourishing monarchs at a very early period, for the pyramids them-
selves are considered by M. Mariette and other high authorities to
have been constructed about 4000 years B.C., and even at that early
period it would appear that the Sphinx was suffering from age, for
we possess a decree by which Cheops provides for its repair. Quitting
now the Neolithic, or second Stone Age, we come to the Paleolithic,
or first Stone Age. At this period man appears to have been ignorant
not only of metals, but of pottery. The stone implements are much
ruder, and are simply chipped into form, being never ground or
polished. We have no evidence of the existence of any domestic
animals, and man probably lived mainly on the produce of the chase,
contending for the possession of Europe with animals which now
exist only in distant regions, or have become entirely extinct. So
unexpected were these facts, so improbable did they appear, that
geologists accepted them only after reiterated and incontrovertible
proofs. The observations made by Mr. Frere at the beginning of
the century were neglected. The researches of MM. Tournal and
Christol in the caves of the South of France, now just half-a-century
ago—the still more complete investigations of Dr. Schmerling in
those of Belgium during the years 1833-34—-searcely raised even a
doubt upon the subject. Those of Mr. McEnery in Kent’s cavern
attracted little attention ; subsequent observations made there by Mr.
Vivian were refused publication on account of the inherent improba-
bility of the conclusions to which they pointed. The discoveries of M,
Boucher de Perthes were neglected for a quarter of a century, and it
is not too much to say that if geologists are open to blame at all for
their behaviour with reference to this question it would certainly be |
The Président’s Address. 15 |
rather for their incredulity—for their blind adherence to traditional
ehronology—than for too ready an acceptance of new views. Yet
they may well be pardoned for long hesitation before they could
bring themselves to believe that man really inhabited Europe at a
time when not only the urus and the bison and the reindeer occupied
the whole of Europe as far south as the Alps, but when the cave
lion, the cave bear, the long-haired rhinoceros, the mammoth, the
musk sheep, and the hippopotamus also formed part of the European
fauna; when the climate was very different and liable to great oscil-
lations; when our rivers had but begun to excavate their valleys,
and the whole condition of the country must therefore have been
singularly different from what it is now. Gradually, however, the
evidence became overwhelming; the statements of Tournal and
Christol were confirmed by Lartet and Christy, by De Vibraye and
others; those of Schmerling by Dupont; of McEnery by Vivian and
Pengelly.; and at length the evidence, well summed up in his work
-on “Cave Hunting,” by Mr. Boyd Dawkins, himself a successful
worker in this field of research, left no room for doubt. As regards
the drift gravels, M. de Perthes not only discovered unmistakable
flint implements in the drift gravel of the Somme valley, but he.
convinced every one that these implements really belonged to the
gravels in which they occurred, and he taught us to find similar im-
plements for ourselves in the corresponding strata of the river systems.
For the full significance, however, of these facts, we are indebted to
the profound geological knowledge of Mr. Prestwich, while Mr.
Evans taught us to appreciate the essential characteristics which
distinguish the stone implements of the two periods, to which I
have ventured to give the names Paleolithic and Neolithic. Charac-
teristic remains of the Paleolithic period have been found in this
neighbourhood by Dr. Blackmore, Mr. Stevens, Mr. James Brown, »
and others. We shall see an interesting series of them when we
visit the Museum. Whether man existed in Europe at a still earlier
period, in pre-glacial, or even as some suppose in miocene times, is
a question still under discussion, and into which I will not now enter.
Under any circumstances the antiquity of the human race must
be very considerable. This conclusion rests upon three distinct
16 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
considerations. The forms of the implements are indeed unlike those
which characterise the Neolithic period. But although it is a re-
markable fact, and one the significance of which must not be over- —
looked, that while on the one hand the forms of the Palzolithic
period are entirely wanting in our tumuli; so on the other, the
polished implements, the finely-carved spear-heads of the Neolithic
period, have never yet been found in the drift gravel. Nevertheless,
the antiquity does not depend on these considerations. The three
reasons which have induced geologists and antiquaries to ascribe so
great an age to these remains are—firstly, the mammalian remains
with which they are associated; secondly, and still more, the nature
and position of the deposits in which they occur ; lastly, and most
of all, the changes of climate which are indicated by the facts. The
animal remains which characterise this period are certainly of very
great interest. Who would have thought, not many years ago, that
the remarkable fauna to which I have just alluded had ever inhabited
our valleys and wandered in our forests and over our downs. A
striking illustration of this fauna is that discovered in the Cave of
Kesserloch, near Thayngen, in Switzerland, recently explored by
Mr. Merk, whose memoir has been translated into English by Mr,
Lee. Not only, however, is this fauna remarkable from the list of
species, but also with reference to their relative abundance. Thus,
the Alpine and the field hare were both present, but the former was
by far the most abundant. The reindeer, again, was fifty times as
numerous as the red deer; but, perhaps, the most surprising case is
that of the foxes. About eighty individuals were represented, and
of these 45°50 belonged to the Canis fulvus, or North American fox,
20°30 to the Arctic fox (Canis lagopus), which has also been met
with in England by Mr Busk under similar circumstances, and will,
probably, be found to have been sometimes mistaken for the common
fox ; while of the common European fox only two or three could be
determined. In other respects the fauna of this ancient period is
interesting as tending to connect forms now distinct. Thus, according
to Mr. Busk, than whom there is no higher authority on the Pleisto-
cene mammalia, some remains of bears found in the bone caves are
identical with those of the American grizzly bear, and the ancient.
The President’s Address. 17
bison was intermediate between the existing bison of America and
theEuropean aurochs. The next consideration on which the antiquity
of these remains depends is the nature and position of the river
gravels in which they are found. These gravels have evidently been
formed and deposited by the rivers themselves where they ran at a
higher level, that is to say, before they had excavated their valleys
to the present depth. Even at that time the areas of drainage, at
least of the principal rivers in question, for instance the Somme, the
Seine, the Oise, the Thames, &c., were the same as now. This is
proved by the fact that the pebbles which constitute the gravels are
always such as might have been derived from the area of drainage.
Thus the gravels of the Somme are made up of flint pebbles, the
district drained by that river being entirely a chalk area. But if
the river during the Paleolithic period had extended only six miles
further inland, it would have entered upon an area containing rocks
of earlier periods, fragments of which must in such a ease have
formed a constituent part of its gravels. This consideration is very
important because it shows that the valleys must have been excavated
by the present rivers; and even admitting that from the then con-
dition of the climate and from other considerations floods of that
period may have been both more frequent and more violent; still
the excavation of the valleys must have been due to the rainfall of
each respective area, and thus not ascribable either to one great
cataclysm or to the fact of the rivers having drained larger areas
than at present. In many cases the excavation of the valley is even
greater than might at first be supposed. The valley of the Somme,
for instance, is forty feet deeper in reality than its present form
would indicate, the river having filled it up again to that extent.
The valley itself is from 200 to 250 feet in depth, and although this
affords us no means of making even an approximate calculation as to
time, still it is obvious that to excavate a valley, such as that of the
Somme, to a depth of 250 feet, and to fill it up to the extent of 30
or 40 feet with sand, silt and peat, must have required a very con-
siderable lapse of time. Passing on now to the question of climate,
it will be observed that the assemblage of mammalia to which I
have already referred, is remarkable in several ways. It is interesting
VOL. XVII.—NO, XLIX. c
18 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
to find that man co-existed in our woods and valleys—on Salisbury
Plain, and on the banks of the Avon—with animals which are now
to be found only in remote regions or which are altogether extinct.
It is sufficiently surprising to reflect that on this very spot where
we are now assembled there once ranged large herds of those strange
and gigantic animals; but another most interesting consideration
is, that when we come to consider them more closely, we shall see
that they constitute in reality two distinct groups. The hippopo-
tamus, for instance, and probably the hyena, extended into Great
Britain, the porcupine into Belgium, the African elephant into Spain
and Sicily, facts all indicating a climate warmer than the present.
On the other hand the mammoth and the long-haired rhinoceros,
the reindeer and the marmot, the Arctic hare and fox, the ibex,
chamois, and the musk-sheep, point decidedly to Arctic conditions.
The musk-sheep, indeed, has the most northern range of any known
mammal. Passing over for the present those mammalia which seem
to indicate a tropical climate, let us consider what may be called the
Arctic group, and I may observe in passing that the existence of a
very cold climate during the latest geological period had been in-
ferred from other considerations, even when our knowledge of the
mammalian fauna was much less considerable and consequently less
suggestive. Various theories have been suggested to account for
the fact that at a period, geologically speaking so recent, the climate
of Europe should have been so different from what it is at present,
and the best authorities seem now to consider that the true explanation
is to be found in astronomical causes. If the plane of the equator
coincided exactly with that of the ecliptic every day would be suc-
ceeded by a night of equal length. In consequence, however, of the
obliquity of the ecliptic, this only happens twice in the year, namely,
on the 20th of March, and 23rd of September, which days divide
the year into two halves, the day being longer than the night in the
spring and summer, and shorter, on the other hand, in autumn and
winter. Under existing circumstances then, we have in the northern
hemisphere seven days more of summer than of winter, while in the
southern hemisphere they have, on the other hand, seven days more
of winter than of summer. ‘This, however, has not been, nor will it
The President's Address. 19
be always the case; on the contrary, a gradual change is continually
taking place during a cycle of 21,000 years. Taken by itself the
balance of astronomical authority is not, I think, of opinion that
this would greatly influence our climate. The effect, however, which
the obliquity of the ecliptic would exercise depends greatly on the de-
gree of eccentricity of the earth’s orbit. This is continually changing,
and the more elliptical it is the greater the effect produced by the
above-mentioned causes. At present the orbit is nearly circular,
and consequently the difference of temperature between the two
hemispheres is less than usual. Mr. Croll and Mr. Stone have
caleulated the eccentricity for the last million of years, and have
_~ shown that there are two periods especially, one namely from 850,000
SS eee Se
Pe ig es
to 750,000 years ago, the other from 200,000 to 100,000 years ago,
when the eccentricity of the orbit was far greater than usual, and
when, therefore, the difference of temperature between the two
hemispheres would also have been unusually great. From 100,000
to 200,000 years ago, then, there was a period when our climate
underwent violent oscillations, being for 10,500 years far colder than
now, then for a similar period far hotter, then far colder again, and
so on for several variations. These alternations of hot and cold
periods beautifully explain the difficult problem of how to account
for the existence of remains belonging to tropical and to Arctic ani-
mals associated together in the same river gravels. It also throws light
on the fact, first pointed out by my friend, M. Marlot, that there
are in Switzerland geological indications of several periods of extreme
cold with others of more genial climate, and Mr. Croll,in his “ Climate
and Time,” has shown, from the evidence of two hundred and fifty
borings in the Scotch glacial beds, that many of them show evidence
of the existence of warm interglacial periods. The antiquity of this
period therefore really must be solved by the mathematician and
physicist rather than by the antiquary, and it affords us an excellent
illustration of the manner in which the different branches of science
depend upon one another, and of the fact that the more science ad-
vances the more necessary it is that our higher education should be
based on a wide foundation.
The Bisuor proposed a vote of thanks to Sir John Lubbock for
c 2
20 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
the very interesting lecture which he had been good enough to give
them. For his own part he confessed himself to have been born in
what the late Lord Derby termed the “ pre-scientific period,” and the
consequence was that a considerable part of what Sir John Lubbock
had stated had passed over his mind with much less impression
than it would, he trusted, when he had an opportunity of reading
it. Those things in which the Members of the Society took so
great an interest were of the greatest possible consequence, and he
cordially agreed with the concluding portion of Sir John Lubbock’s
remarks. But he was an old schoolmaster, and he should like to
know what they would all become if the whole cycle of science was
to be entered into by students seeking a higher education? What
would they become? why, they would become, each one of them,
Wiltshire in miniature, highly informed in matters dating from the
earliest to the latest times, and knowing all things that man knew
or could know. He should be very sorry indeed to say one syllable
in disparagement of that not less than sacred and holy work which
science was doing for the human race. Every single department of
science was precious in the last degree, and he entirely agreed with
the sentiments of Sir John Lubbock, as far as his own wretchedly
small knowledge of science enabled him to judge, that every depart-
ment of science was necessary to the full development of the rest.
As long as science was tentative, and made its steps sure and certain
as it advanced, let it go on, and might God bless it. It could not
be otherwise than beneficial to mankind, not only in the ways in
which they could trace, but in the untraceable improvement of the
human race which consisted in the attainment of higher stages of
knowledge that was precious ; but, more than that, there was not
one department of science from which they did not derive great
physical, social, and even moral and religious benefit. But above —
and beyond all those steps of steady scientific investigation, which
he recognised as great steps in the improvement of the human
race, there was and must be in the progress of science a glorious
capacity of guessing. It was, in point of fact, one of the necessities
of science that as it made each step forward it went at once into an
infinitude of guesses. But let them not confound the mere guesses
Visit to the Cathedral. 21
with the actual discoveries. They must guess; it was the very
privilege of science that they must guess, and as it made one step
forward it shot onward and seemed to catch a glimpse of something
beyond, which, by careful study, it might or might not ultimately
make good. But let them keep distinctly before them those two
departments of science—the one the steady, onward stepping, every
step made sure and certain, and the other equally precious and equally
necessary but entirely different department of guessing before they
quite knew. They must guess, for imagination was as necessary as
scientific accuracy. But he would not at that time say more. He
desired, on the part of the audience, to offer their best thanks to Sir
John Lubbock for the interesting address which he had given them,
which he, for his part, should appreciate more fully when he should
be enabled, as he hoped he should, to read it.
The Mayor seconded the motion, which was very heartily accepted
and endorsed by the meeting.
The Rev. H. A. Oxtvier, as one of the Curators of the Museum,
then gave an outline of what had been done in the way of developing
and arranging the Museum of the Society at Devizes, and expressed
the hope that funds would be supplied for its farther enlargement,
as well as for making good a deficiency which still existed in con-
nection with the recent additions which had been made to it by pur-
chase.
Mr. E. T. Stevens impressed upon all who intended to take part
in the excursions, the importance of punctuality; and the Ven.
Arcupgacon Lxar having made a few remarks respecting the pro-
posed visit to the Cathedral, the proceedings at the Council House
were brought to a close.
VISIT TO THE CATHEDRAL. |
A large number of Members and their friends assembled at four
o’clock at the Close Gate, facing the High Street, where they were
met by the Ven. Archdeacon Lear, who most kindly, courteously
and patiently conducted the numerous visitors round and through
the Cathedral, pointing out all the objects of chief interest, ex-
plaining the history, and relating the traditions and legends connected
22 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
with that noble building, and calling attention to the chief monuments,
with all which no one is more thoroughly acquainted than the Arch-
deacon; and it was a real treat, even for those who were familiar
with its chief beauties, to be thus guided over our glorious Cathedral.
The Archdeacon began by pointing out a figure in a niche of the
Close Gate, about which there had been considerable discussion, for
whereas some declared it to be an exact likeness of Charles II.,
others stated it to be undoubtedly a bust of James I.; the truth
of the matter however he would leave it to the archzologists to de-
termine. The Archdeacon then directed the attention of the company
to the splendid view of the sacred edifice from the point to which
he bad conducted them, just inside the churchyard: he pointed out
the site of the old belfry tower, which was destroyed during Wyatt’s
alterations at the latter end of the last century, portions of its foun-
dations, owing to the dryness of the summer, being now distinctly
visible: and he then explained the history of the construction of the
tower and spire. After remarking upon the insecure state of the
spire some fourteen years ago, and the steps taken by Sir Gilbert
Scott to make it secure, he directed their attention to the little door
near the top of the spire called the “ weather door.” Above this, he
said, were iron cramps projecting from the spire, by the means of
which a man used to go to the top annually, to oil the vane.
There was now sufficient oil there for ten or twelve years, but when
that period had expired he questioned whether they would find any
person as ready and willing to go up as had been the man who for-
merly went. The company then proceeded towards the west front.
Here the Archdeacon directed attention to the statuary, remarking
that in 1865, instead of the statues that they saw before them, there
were only six mutilated figures to represent what once were there.
The front before them was a theological or Te Deum one, representing
the praise that they offered to God in the Te Deum. At the top, in
the centre, was our Lord in Majesty, and underneath five tiers of
figures. Those in the upper tier represented angels and archangels,
the second, Old Testament Saints—David, with his harp, and Moses,
with the tables of the law, being particularly discernible: on the
_ third tier were New Testament Saints, and descending to the next
Visit to the Cathedral. “2S
they had on the left-hand side the Doctors of the Church, and on the
opposite side Virgins or Martyrs. On the last tier were figures of
old English worthies, more especially those of local fame—Bishop
Poore, with his Cathedral in his hand, and St. Osmund. The twelve
figures over the west window were the gift of a clergyman who for-
merly lived in the diocese—Mr. Bicknell. The figure of the blessed
Virgin, underneath the poreh—in whose honour the Church is dedi-
eated, was pointed out. The name of the bird over the Majesty
was a moot question which perhaps some of the archxologists could
decide, some considering it a pelican, some a dove, and some an eagle.
One of the company asked if the statues which formerly were there
represented the same persons now,to which the Ven. Archdeacon replied
that Mr. Redfern, whose loss they must all deeply deplore, worked
out these figures from what appeared to have been there before. At
the present time he was not quite sure whether there were not more
figures on the front than there ever were. Entering the sacred
edifice by the main entrance, the Archdeacon pointed out the scroll
or decorative work over the doorway, and remarked that marble
which had been used in the restoration was not’ Purbeck, as it was
originally, but Devonshire, the former not being suited to that climate.
After describing the architecture of the nave the Archdeacon drew
attention to the two remarkable figures, which were brought from
Old Sarum, and which are placed on the stone bench beneath the
third arch from the west door on the south side of the Church. He
observed that the easternmost of these two figures is said to be that
of Bishop Roger, who died in 1139, while the other figure is supposed
to represent Bishop Joceline, who died in 1184.—The Rev, Canon
Jones, of Bradford, said he was of opinion that the figure which was
said to be that of Roger was a monument to Joceline, while he be-
lieved that the incised slab represented the figure of a later bishop
than Joceline. Mr. Jones said that he should further allude to this
subject in his paper on “The Bishops of Old Sarum,” which he
should read on Thursday evening.—The Archdeacon then continued
his description of the monuments, directing particular attention to
the effigy said to be that of the Boy Bishop. It was one, he said,
of great interest, and upon which archeologists had had great
24 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
discussion. He then mentioned the tradition relating to it, that it was:
the tomb of a chorister, who died during his elevation, but said he
considered that that idea had been swept away. The company then
inspected the monument of William Longspee, the first Earl of
Salisbury (a natural son of King Henry II. by Fair Rosamond),
which, the Archdeacon remarked, was an interesting monument of
an interesting man. In answer to a question the Archdeacon said
the monuments in the nave were moved there. There were some
there originally, but most of them were brought there, which was a
sad thing to do, as their whole history was obscured by their removal.
The spot where the Hungerford Chapel originally stood was then
pointed out, after which attention was called to the way in which
the “legs” of the tower bulged out. Standing under the very
centre of the spire, the Archdeacon said in 1737 it was thought that
the spire was more out of its perpendicular than formerly, and a
plumbing was taken. Some years since it was again taken by
Mr. Fisher, when it was found that no further deviation had
taken place. It now deflected 20 inches to the south-west.
The Archdeacon then described the restoration now taking place in
the choir, and called particular attention to the restored colouring of
the roof, and to the medallions between the groinings, which are as
near as possible restorations of the old paintings executed in the latter
part of the thirteenth century. In the centre was represented our
Blessel Lord “ in Majesty,” and on the west, leading up to him, were
prophets, and Old Testament characters; while east of the central
figure and towards where the altar would stand, were a number of
figures partaking more of a secular character, and representing the
months of theyear. There was February, for instance, represented by a
person warming himself at a fire: August, by the cutting of corn,
finishing up with December, represented by a man killing a pig for
his Christmas dinner. He observed that some persons were of opinion
that the high altar must originally have been under the representa-
tion of the “ Majesty,” and not under the meaner subjects of the
months. Sir Gilbert Scott was, however, of a different opinion, and
in an elaborate report which he had issued on the subject, had stated
the result of his investigations was that the high altar was always
Visit to the Cathedral. 25
situated in the middle of the easternmost bay of the choir; that is
to say, half of a bay in front of the screen which parted off the lady
chapel or ambulatory. The Archdeacon added that the restoration
committee had acted on the suggestion of Sir Gilbert, and the re-
stored altar would be placed in the position which that eminent
architect had suggested. He then referred with much satisfaction
to the painting on the westernmost bay on the south side, which had
been entirely coloured, as a specimen of what would be done in the
other bays provided sufficient money could be obtained for carrying
out the colouring.—Mr. J. H. Parxur, of Oxford, expressed his ad-
miration of the restored bay and of the colouring in general of the
choir, and he sincerely thanked the Dean and Chapter for the noble
example which they had set. Mr. Parker further observed that he was
decidedly of opinion that the high altar originally stood beneath the
“ Majesty,” and he said this from a knowledge of most of the prin-
cipal Churches of Europe.—The Archdeacon continued his description
of the rest of the Cathedral. The brass plate to the memory of
Bishop Wyvil was then pointed out. The cicerone remarked that
it was a matter of dispute as to where the screen in the lady chapel
came from. The traditional tomb of Bishop Richard Poore, the
founder of the Cathedral, was pointed out, and the Ven. Archdeacon
Lear remarked thas it was intended to put it in its proper position on
the north side of the altar, and as the choir was restored to the memory
of Bishop Hamilton he considered that a recumbent figure of him
should be placed on the opposite side.—Canon Jonzs took exception
to the monument being that of Bishop Poore-—The Hungerford
Chapel was then pointed out, the Ven. Archdeacon remarking that
it was brought there from the nave by the Bishop and Dean and
Chapter of the day, to be used as a seat for the family of Lord Radnor.
He (the Archdeacon) trusted that the time would come when it
would be removed, at present he need only say that there were certain
difficulties in the way. The reredos he mentioned in passing, had
been presented by the Earl of Beauchamp, in memory of his.ancestor
Bishop Beauchamp. The old glass of the Cathedral was an object of
much attention, the Archdeacon remarking that it was thought that a
portion of that in the centre came from Old Sarum, The company
26 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
then passed into the vestry, where, laid out on a table, was a copy
of Magna Charta, 1215, an old and faded vestment, and a “ general
Charter of Liberties of King Stephen, 1136.” The former and the
‘latter were enshrined in a small oak case with glass over it. Both
were objects of great interest to the company. The copy of Magna
Charta is supposed to be a contemporary transcript intrusted to
the care of William Longspee, Earl of Salisbury, as one of the
witnesses of the original deed. The Chapter House was then in-
spected, the Archdeacon remarking that in the year 1854 it was
more or less aruin. It had since then been restored to the memory
of Bishop Denison. The centre column had been taken out, and
rebuilt, and some unsightly iron bars, which used to go from the roof to
it, done away with. The restoration had been effected by Mr. Clutton,
the colouring by Mr. Hudson, who represented the colour originally
there, and the carving by Mr. Phillips. The carving under the
vestibule was much admired. The Archdeacon then conducted the
party to the cloisters, after which he pointed out the beautiful view
obtained from the south-west angle of the cloisters. He added that
the cloisters had been in part restored at the expense of the late
Bishop Denison.—Mr. Parxsr expressed his regret at the manner
in which the painting on the walls of the chapter house was peeling
off the stone. He suggested the employment of tea-lead as a sur-
face for painting, in order to prevent the effects of the damp, though
he acknowledged we had not yet found the right means of protection.
He again thanked the Dean and Chapter for what they had done
with regard to the colouring of the choir. It was a glorious ex-
* ample, and he trusted it would in time be followed in most of the
Churches in the land.—The party then passed from the cloisters,
and conducted by the Bishop, visited the grounds of the Palace,
whence the splendid view of the Cathedral elicited unanimous ad-
miration ; and after an expression of cordial thanks to the Archdeacon
for the admirable way in which he had acted as their guide, the
~ company dispersed.
THE DINNER
Took place at the Hamilton Hall, and was well served by the White
Hart Hotel Company. Above a hundred of the Members and
- bet
The Dinner. 27
their friends were present; with Sir John Lubbock in the chair.
After the usual loyal toasts, the Prestpent, in proposing the
“Bishop and Clergy,” said how very glad they were to see the
Bishop of the Diocese among them that day, and they could not
regard it but as a great compliment that he had remained in the
city, at a time when he proposed going on a well-earned holiday, on
purpose to welcome the Society: he was sure they all appreciated
that mark of his sympathy with them, and of his interest in arche-
ology. They were all very much indebted to the Clergy of the
city and neighbourhood, as well as of the Diocese at large, for their
co-operation (indeed their Secretary, the Rev. A. C. Smith, was one
of that body), but he especially desired to mention the name of the
Venerable Archdeacon to whom they were so much indebted for the
explanation and description of the Cathedral; and to whom he
tendered the best thanks of the Society for the valuable assistance
he had kindly rendered them that day.
The Ven. Arcupracon Lear, in responding, said it was quite
true that the Bishop was ready packed up and would start on the fol-
lowing morning, in order to get what he was sure no one would grudge
him, a little cessation from labour. Had it not been that he was
about to leave Salisbury for a season, nothing would have given him
greater pleasure than to have welcomed the Members of the Society
to a conversazione at the Palace. As for himself it had been a
pleasure to have been toa certain extent a guide to the distinguished
company that afternoon, and he would say that the Clergy welcomed
the Society to the cathedral city, because, among other reasons, in
their Cathedral and Churches in the neighbourhood they were sure
that much would be found of importance and interest to the Mem-
bers of the Society, and they further weleomed the Members because
they trusted that on the morrow they would be told a great deal
more about Stonehenge than they at present knew. He hoped
their visit would be a pleasant one, and their excursions would be _
- full of interest and profit.
In responding to the toast of “the President,” Sir Jounn Lusspock
said that though he came among them as a stranger, he had found
some warm and kind friends. He regarded the reception they had
28 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
given him as one paid to him rather as the President of the Society,
and he valued it none the less on that account. Those local societies
were performing a very useful and excellent work. Whatever
Government was in power, he hoped they would succeed in pre-
serving the ancient monuments of the country, of which they were
so proud. In what their Society had done, they had set a good
example to other counties. It was an example which, fortunately,
was very generally followed, and on that very day in a neighbouring ©
county, a similar association was being formed, and he hoped it
would enjoy a prosperous and successful career. Their Society, as
he had said, had done a very useful work, and he hoped the good
example they had set would be followed widely throughout the
country. He had much pleasure now in proposing “ the health of
the Mayor of Salisbury,” who had received them with so much good-
will and kindness. The prosperity of the Society depended greatly
upon the manner in which they were received on the occasions of
their visits, and he was sure they all felt with himself, extremely
indebted to the city and to the Mayor for the cordial manner in
which they had been received on that occasion.
The Mayor, (C. H. Ravotirre, Esq.,) said they were indebted
to that and other kindred societies for many a good name and family
2
and many valuable historical associations being rescued from oblivion,
and there were to be found in the Wiltshire Magazine materials for
a most valuable history of the county, for which te as ‘county
men were deeply indebted to the Society.
The other officers of the Society were duly honoured, and Mr.
Tatzor took occasion to deprecate any distinction being recognized
between North and South Wilts, more especially in matters per-
taining to the Society.
Mr. Parker, in proposing “the health of the Secretaries of the
Meeting,” said that he had been connected with a good many
societies and he had often heard the remark made that they could
do no real good without funds. The President of their Society had
set a noble example to the whole country, for he had bought a part
of Avebury, in order to preserve it. It would be a grand thing if
they could put such societies in a position to do similar things. He
The Dinner. 29
was personally acquainted with the inspectors of monuments in
France and Germany, and in both those countries they would find
the same difficulties arising from want.of funds. In both these
countries they refused to take money out of the treasury for arche-
ological purposes, on the ground that it was not just to take money
out of the public funds for any such object. Some years ago while
in Germany he came upon a very fine old Church that was about to
be sold for the value of the materials. He wrote to the inspector
of monuments about it, and in his reply he said he had had his eye
upon it, but that he could do nothing as he had not been able to get
a penny towards purchasing the materials. He asked him (Mr.
Parker) to write to the King of Prussia on the subject, but as he
did not know the King he could not see his way to write to him,
but knowing that the Princess Imperial was Princess Victoria of
England, he ventured to write to her upon the subject. The answer
was to the effect, “ I have spoken to the King, he has spoken to the
minister, the money is paid, and the Church is saved.” He was
afraid they would never get the House of Commons to grant money
for any such purposes. The work must be done by individuals, and
without funds no work could be done. They wanted such an office
as that which Sir John Lubbock had proposed in his bill—an office
where ancient properties should be registered as national property,
and placed under the charge of officers in the districts in which they
were situated, and he sincerely hoped that the Secretaries of the
Wiltshire Society would not be left without funds.
Mr. Stevens, in responding, expressed approval of what Mr.
Talbot had stated, and said that they wished to knock down any
barrier which might exist between North and South in that as in
all other things. He thought that, putting himself as Secretary
out of view altogether, they had done a wise thing in appointing a
Secretary for South Wilts, because in doing so they had done some-
thing that would tend to break down the barrier which had been
referred to, and he hoped both ends of the county would be can-
vassed, so that the best men should be chosen for conducting the
affairs of the Society.
The Cuatrman said he did not take quite so gloomy a view of the
30 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
House of Commons as Mr. Parker did while referring to the im-
portant question of funds. Last year, when the question to which
Mr. Parker alluded, came before the House, the Government were
newer in office than they were now, and they had so many pressing
matters to consider that they had not time to devote particular
attention to the subject. When the matter afterwards came before
the House most of the Cabinet Ministers were absent, and the
excellent Secretary of the Treasury was left with general orders that
the bill was not one that they could support. But so strong was
the feeling on the subject that no less than nine Conservative mem-
bers got up one after the other and gave it a hearty and enthusiastic
support. He was unfortunate this year in not getting a good place
for his bill, for the progress having been so slow he was precluded
from bringing it forward till late. But when he brought it in again
he should have the support of a great many members, and he had
reason to hope that it would pass next session. He was satisfied,
at any rate, of being able to get a good discussion of the details of
the measure, and if his own bill was not carried, they had good
reason to hope that something of the kind they wanted would be
done, and that the Government would favor some bill which would
to a great extent meet the objects they had in view.
The proceedings at the dinner were terminated by the toast of
“the ladies,’ who honoured the meeting throughout with their
presence in considerable numbers ; and the company then adjourned
to the Blackmore Museum for
THE CONVERSAZIONE,
where they were hospitably entertained with tea, coffee, and other
refreshments, by the liberality of the owners; and where the un-
rivalled collection of implements of primitive races was examined,
not for the first time, by the Members of the Society ; but who
would indeed find many visits insufficient to exhaust the objects of
interest deposited there. Soon after eight, the President took the
chair, when the following papers and addresses were successively
given, but whose titles only are mentioned, as it is hoped they will
all appear 2m extenso in the pages of the Magazine: An address “On
Second Day’s Proceedings. 81
the Petrology of the Stonehenge Stones,” by N. Story MasKELYNE,
Esq., F.R.S., Professor of Mineralogy at Oxford; A paper “ On
Certain Local Occurrences of some of our rarer birds,” by the Rev.
A. P. Morrzs, Vicar of Britford ; and a paper “ On Amye Robsart,”
by the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.S.A., the latter illustrated by many
old documents discovered by the Reverend Canon at Longleat,
among others, the marriage settlement of Amye Robsart with Robert
Dudley, Earl of Leicester, several letters written by Amye Robsart
herself, and other papers of extraordinary interest, which had been
freely lent for the occasion by the liberality of the Marquis of Bath.
On the motion of the Prusipent, a cordial vote of thanks was
passed to Mr. Story Maskelyne, Rev. A. P. Morres, and Canon
Jackson, for the valuable papers they had severally contributed ;
and with a hearty sense of gratitude to their kind entertainers, the
Trustees and Curators of the Blackmore Museum, the meeting
dispersed.
SECOND DAY, THURSDAY, AUGUST 24x.
THE STONEHENGE EXCURSION.
A bright and glorious autumnal morning greeted the Members of
the Society, when, to the number of something like two hundred,
they assembled at a quarter before nine o’clock, in the Market Place;
and punctually as the clock struck, the Secretary’s whistle sounded,
and Mr. E. T. Stevens, who acted as the “advance guard” of the
party, led a long train of carriages en route for Stonehenge ; and not
only did Mr. Stevens display in both the excursions the consummate
tact and forethought of an able general, keeping his numerous party
together, and collecting stragglers, and arriving at each point at
the precise time indicated in the programme; but he supplied every ex-
cursionist on both days with a most valuable and interesting “ guide”
to the several excursions, so that nothing was passed by unheeded.
For both these exhaustive guide-books, which he modestly denomi-
nated “Jottings,” the Members were indebted to the pen of Mr.
E. T. Stevens, than whom indeed no man is more capable of des-
cribing clearly, comprehensively, and yet concisely, the objects of
32 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
archeological interest with which the routes so richly abounded.
That for the Stonehenge excursion was in reality no trifling pamphlet,
but a goodly volume, containing no less than 236 pages, and was
prefaced by a very excellent map, on which the route and the situ-
ation of the different places and objects of interest were clearly shown.
For the size of the book, the subjects touched upon, explained, and
in some instances discussed, are very numerous, and it was not
without skilful exercise of the art of condensation that Mr. Stevens
could have succeeded in describing so wide and full a field in so
compact a form. After a few concise pages descriptive of the
geological features of the route, the writer enlarged upon the con-
struction and history of Old Sarum, and as the excursion advanced
on the way to Stonehenge, drew attention to the historical associa-
tions of Heale House, to Netton, Great Durnford Church, Ogbury
Camp, Lake House (with an account of the Rev. E. Duke’s valuable
antiquarian collection) , to Amesbury and Vespasian’s Camp, which was
followed by a long and able treatment of the subject of “Stonehenge.”
The Wiltshire barrows and their contents were discussed at length,
and notes were given on the objects of interest to be seen on the return
journey by way of Bemerton. The volume was profusely illustrated,
and will doubtless be preserved by those Members of the Society
who were so fortunate as to be present, as a very able description of
a memorable excursion. The excursionists were also furnished with
a pamphlet, containing notes on Amesbury Church and Abbey, by
Mr. W. C. Kem, in which that gentleman gave a most interesting
outline of the remarkable historical associations which belong to
this ancient Church and Abbey.
The first stoppage made was at “ Old Sarum,” now the “ lone dry
hill by the river,” but formerly the city of the Celt, the Roman,
the Saxon, the Dane, and the Norman. Here, at the entrance to
the principal vallum, an address was delivered by Mr. Roach Surru,
F.S.A., who said the company had before them one of the most re-
markable monuments of antiquity, not only of this country, but of
the North of Europe. Luckily, their study of a series of interesting
remains commenced yesterday, when they had the advantage of
hearing Sir John Lubbock’s description of those of pre-historic times.
The Stonehenge Excursion. 33
They were to-day following in his footsteps. They saw before them
the remains of a period so remote that they could hardly contemplate
its vastness. They had already seen other portions of those remains
in the extraordinary museum which had been founded at Salisbury
by Mr. Blackmore, to whom he took that opportunity of expressing
his profound thanks for the great assistance which he had thus ren-
dered to the science of archexology. In respect to Old Sarum, they
were greatly indebted to the history of the late Mr. Hatcher, who
devoted to a study of the subject no inconsiderable portion of his life,
They were likewise greatly indebted to Mr. John Young Akerman,
another Wiltshire archzologist. In examining Old Sarum they advan-
ced to a later stage than that which was reached by Sir John Lubbock
yesterday. They came on from the verge of pre-historic to historic
archeology. Old Sarum was one of a great series of remains which
extended throughout this country and France. By whom the
originals were formed and established, it was impossible to say. One
thing was certain, that when Cesar invaded Britain, some of the
mother tribes were easily subdued. And the people were the better
' for it. They might have lost the root of liberty, but they acequired
civilization. In this part of Britain the Romans, after having es-
tablished towns and formed roads thought it necessary to do some-
thing more. Vespasian was sent over from Germany, and his pro-
gress from the Isle of Wight to this part of the country had been
carefully traced by Mr. Charles Warne, whose work he had the
pleasure of commending to their notice. Vespasian took some twenty
British towns from the Belgz and Deotriges, of which it was not
unlikely that Old Sarum was one. In the fortresses which they
formed the Britons were sagacious enough to provide for the pasture
of their flocks and herds, as well as for the accommodation of vast
numbers of people. They had an instance before them. As to the
vallum near which they were standing, it was 106 feet deep, and
was one of the greatest in this country. There were some which
were more complicated—Maiden Castle, near Dorchester, for instance
—but for depth and length this stood before all others. The speaker
then proceeded to refer to the citadel, which, he said, was entirely
Norman, and was surrounded by a massive wall which could still be
VOL, XVII.—NO. XLIX, D
34 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
traced. The place must have been almost, if not quite impregnable.
When the Romans had taken possession of this part of Britain, they
formed numerous straight roads, some of which converged at Old
Sarum. It was a matter of surprise, however, to him that he had
never been able to find any traces of the Romans at Old Sarum.
Dr. Stukeley—one of the most intelligent of antiquaries—had pointed
out a fragment of what he believed to have been a Roman wall which
formerly extended around the fortress. Sir Richard Colt Hoare did
not remark upon it, but they would have an opportunity of seeing
it. If part of a Roman castle the question arose whether the Romans
might not have been living in juxta-position, and in friendly alliance
with the Britons? That was evidently the case in many other parts
of Britain. . There was no trace, even in the Salisbury Museum, of
a hostile occupation of Old Sarum by the Romans. Was not that
a sign of a peaceful alliance, and of the general prosperity of that
part of the country? The speaker then referred to the removal of
the Cathedral from Old to New Sarum, and expressed his belief that
the original stones were used in the erection of the new building.
Having visited the citadel the company went to look at the frag-
ment of so-called Roman masonry on the north side of the fortress.
Mr. Smitx expressed his strong belief that it was Roman: it was
certainly unlike Norman and medieval work altogether. He re-
pudiated the notion that it was part of a continuous wall, and had
no doubt whatever that it was what he had stated.
Mr. Parker confessed that he had come to the spot with con-
siderable prejudice against the work being Roman, but now that he
had seen it he could not help agreeing in Mr. Smith’s opinion that
it was really a piece of Roman work. He could not see what
else it could be but Roman work. In Norman masonry they had
fine joints, while the joints of this wall were very open. It was not
Norman, it was pre-Norman, and it might be a Roman round tower.
Mr. Stevens stated that the Dean and Chapter and Mr. Marsh,
the occupant of the land, had given permission to test whether it
was a portion of a rectangular building or a circular wall. As to
Mr. Roach Smith’s statement, he would venture to say that there
was a good deal of evidence to show that the masonry really formed
The Stonehenge Excursion. 85
part of a circular wall, and Mr. Marsh himself had carted hundreds of
loads of the material, and had seen enough to satisfy him that there
was a circular foundation of about five feet in width, which he judged
to be continuous with the portion before them.
Mr. Marsz stated that that was so, and that the carting away of
material had gone on for ten or fifteen years.
Mr. Roaca Sirs expressed himself as still confident that, when
the foundations were laid open, his theory would be found to be the
correct one.
Being unable to settle that knotty point, the archeologists then
returned to their carriages and proceeded on their way ; first visiting
the interesting old Church of Great Durnford, and then climbing
the hill to Ogbury Camp. This earth-work, as stated by Mr.
Stevens in his excellent guide, is of very simple construction. It
includes an area of about sixty-two acres, and is defended by an
earthen bank, about thirty-three feet in height, without an aceom-
panying ditch; there is an entrance on the eastern side. Stukeley
thus describes it :— On the east side of the river Avon, by Great
Durnford, is a very large camp, covering the whole top of a hill, of
no determinate figure, as humouring the height it stands on; it is
entirely without any ditch, the earth being heaped up very steep in
the nature of a parapet, when dug away level at the bottom. I doubt
not but this was a camp of the Britons, and perhaps an oppidum,
where they retired at night from the pasturage upon the river, with
their cattle; within it are many little banks carried straight, and
meeting one another at right-angles, square, oblong parallels, and
some oblique, as the meres and divisions between ploughed lands ;
yet it seems never to have been ploughed ; and there is likewise a
small squarish work intrenched, no bigger than a large tent; these
seem to me the distinctions and divisions for the several quarters and
lodgments of the people within. This camp has an aspect very old;
the prominent part of the rampart in many places quite consumed
by time, though the steep remains perfect; one being the natural
earth, the other fictitious.” Sir Richard Hoare confirms the accuracy
of the above description, but considers that the “ small squarish
work” is of very recent date, “It is singular,” adds Mr. Stevens,
. D2
36 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
“that so few relics are to be found in, and near, the camps of this
neighbourhood. I have hunted over Ogbury, Chlorus’ Camp, and
Old Sarum, with the well-known archeologist, Mr. Evans, whose
eye is perhaps the keenest in England for a worked flint, and yet
during the entire day we scarcely found a specimen worth taking
home.”
Mr: Parker, in his address, said he regarded the camp as a British
one, because it followed the outlines of the hill, and was not formed
in a parallelogram, as Roman camps always were.
Descending the steep hill from Ogbury Cam j, and crossing the
Avon by a bridge of boats, the archeologists passed by a pleasant
and shady walk to Lake House, where they were heartily weleomed
and hospitably entertained by the Rev. E. Duke, and where that
gentleman’s well-known collection of antiquities attracted universal
admiration. But Lake House itself must not be passed by without
a word, for with its gabled roof and trimly-kept yew hedges, it is
one of the most picturesque objects that lie in the route between
Salisbury and Stonehenge, from which latter it is about two miles
distant. The estate of Lake was purchased by George Duke, in
1576. The house was built about the middle of Queen Elizabeth’s
reign. It is, in fact, a very pure and interesting specimen of
Elizabethan architecture.
The collection of antiquities is very interesting and valuable
generally, but deserves special notice from our Society on account
of its local character; and in our eyes perhaps the most important
feature in the collection is a series of objects, exhumed by Mr. Duke’s
late father, from burial mounds in the immediate neighbourhood,
some seventy years ago. They include a number of amber ornaments,
which were inspected with much interest, as was also a highly-
finished mould of syenite, evidently intended to be used in casting
bronze celts. It was found near Nine Mile Water, in the parish of
Bulford. At Lake may also be seen a very interesting collection of
fossils and minerals; as well as a number of stuffed specimens of
mammalia, birds, and fish, killed on the estate.
Sir Jonn Lussock having proposed a cordial vote of thanks to
Mr. and Mrs. Duke for their kindness and hospitality, the party
The Stonehenge Excursion. 37
resumed their journey, stopping at Amesbury to visit the Church
and a very interesting temporary Museum, which had been formed
by the united exertions of Messrs. Kemm, Edwards, and Zillwood,
and then proceeded to Vespasian’s Camp, where, in a spacious tent,
an excellent lunch awaited them.
At the conclusion of the repast, Sir Jonn Luszock, who presided,
said he thought they would all wish that he should be authorised
in their name to ask their secretaries to return their thanks,
one and all, to Sir Edmund Antrobus, who had done so much to
eontribute to their pleasure that day. Thanks to him, they had the
opportunity of seeing some of the most beautiful scenes in the
county. He desired also to express their thanks for the use of the
room in which the temporary museum had been placed ; also to Mr.
Edwards, Mr. Kemm, and Mr. Zillwood, who had contributed not a
little to the success of the day’s proceedings.
Subsequently an address was delivered at one of the most prominent
parts of the camp, by Mr. Parxur, who described it as the most
perfect Roman camp that he had ever seen. It was a mile-and-a-
half round, but they could hardly see anything of it.
Mr. Parker spoke at considerable length, and there was some
discussion.
The company then proceeded to Stonehenge, at which already a
very large number of persons were collected, awaiting the arrival of
the archeologists; so that the whole area of Stonehenge scarcely
sufficed to contain them all. And here first Mr. Parxsr, ascending
the so-called “ altar-stone,” said he had been requested to say a few
words about those relics of antiquity: he could hardly call them
architectural, but they were the first few steps towards it. He saw
no reason why the stone circles he saw around him should not be
Druidical. Some of the stones were cut, and some were natural
Sarsen, secured by tenons and mortices, which indicated some_skill
in the working of stone. All that led him to suppose that they
could hardly belong to a period before the Britons. They had no
reason to suppose that the Britons knew anything about the cutting
of stones before the arrival of the Romans. He did not say that
those stones were post-Roman, but it was possible that the Romans
38 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
lived with the Britons on friendly terms. He was disposed to believe
that they belonged to the early Roman period—he did not say to
the post-Roman period, Their formation indicated a temple of
some kind, and if they looked at Scripture they would find that
Gilgal meant an assembly of stones—a place of assembly and inter-
ment. Was is not a great and grand central place of worship? Dr.
Buckland himself had put it as the Westminster Abbey of the
Ancient Britons, and did not the tumuli around them present the
earliest evidence of the Britons’ residence amongst the Druids as a
religious people? He was certainly prepared to stick to the idea
that it was a Druidical temple. It was an early Oriental custom to
erect circles of stone for purposes of worship, and that applied to the
Israelites themselves. All he could say was that what they saw
around them showed that the people who erected Stonehenge were
accustomed to work in stone.
Sir Jonn Luszock said that Mr. Parker was one of the best
archzologists in this or any other country, and if he ventured to
differ from some of his opinions, it was really because it was best to
state the honest truth in regard to one’s own belief. There was still a
great deal of mystery about that venerable erection, and in all
probability the mystery would continue to exist. Perhaps that very
mystery was one of its greatest attractions. They could not speak
positively as to its origin or its purpose; they could only express
their opinions and the reasons that induced them to form them, and
every one must judge for himself. It had been stated that one great
clue to the meaning of the monument was to be found in the tumuli
that surrounded it. There were more tumuli around it than were
to be found on any corresponding area in the island, and they might
fairly conclude that the majority of them belonged to the same period
as Stonehenge—though doubtless not in the same year, probably not
in the same century. He believed they would all agree that Stone-
henge and the tumuli around it represented one aspect of English
history, and'that nobody could understand the history of England who
had not made the tour of Wiltshire. If the tumuli were Roman they
would contain glass, pottery, coins, and objects and weapons of iron.
Roman coins were found in hundreds in other places, but not a coin
The Stonehenge Excursion. — 39
or a piece of glass or pottery was found in any of these tumuli,
That was very strong evidence, if not a proof, that the tamuli
belonged to an age when iron was, if not unknown, at any rate very
rare. He could not therefore accept the theory which would give the
monument to Roman or post-Roman times. There was nothing like
it in any part of the world, but there were many stone circles which
were developed into something like the idea of Stonehenge. If that
were the case, surely it must belong to the same state of things as
that which led to the formation of those other stone works. What
did the tumuli contain? In all the periods of the world’s history
there was a tendency to bury with the dead the instruments and
weapons they used, from an idea that in the world to come those
articles would be of use. That was still the practice in some places
at the present time. In thirty-nine of those tumuli articles of
bronze had been found, and therefore he believed that the monument
belonged to what was known as the “ Bronze Age.” He did not wish
however to dogmatise, and he confessed it was a subject upon
which many opinions might legitimately be maintained.
Mr. Cunnineron showed a number of stone chips he had just
picked up from a rut adjoining, which he stated settled the disputed
point as to whether or not the stones were dressed on the spot.
The Rev. J. G. Joycr expressed his concurrence with Sir John
Lubbock’s views, and the Rev. E. L. Barnwe tt strongly differed
from the opinion of Mr. Parker that the stones were a Druidical
temple, although he would not himself call it a funereal monu-
ment.
Mr. Liarvet stated that he had found somewhat similar erections
in New Zealand, which were used for the burial of the dead, and
suggested that the stones might be upon the site of some great battle,
that the great chiefs who fell might have been buried in the tumuli,
and that the temple had been erected in their memory.
Mr. Srevens then made a few remarks as to the character and
forms of several of the stones, and Mr. Masketyne pointed out the
several varieties of stone to which he had called attention the previous
evening.
On leaving Stonehenge the party paid a “ flying visit ” to the old
40 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
and new Churches at Bemerton, also to the rectory, the residence of |
the late George Herbert, and arrived in Salisbury about half-past
seven o’clock—but little later than the time fixed in the programme,
having accomplished the entire excursion proposed, as extended
and as eventful as it was interesting.
SECOND CONVERSAZIONE.
This evening the Mayor, with the most liberal hospitality, en-
tertained the members of the Society, and many other ladies and
gentlemen connected with the city and neighbourhood to the number
of three hundred, at the Council Chamber. An excellent supper
was laid in the Grand Jury Room; and the proceedings were en-
livened during the evening by the performance of a selection of
glees and part songs. In the vestibule Mr. J. W. Singer, of
Frome, exhibited a choice assortment of medieval church plate, of
silver and silver gilt, some of the specimens being enamelled and
-others set with precious stones. There was also a number of old
watches and chatelaines and a collection of ancient Normandy and
other jewellery.
At a quarter before nine the chair was taken by Sir Joun
Lussock, and the following papers were successively read: by W. ~
W. RaveEnuitt, Esq., on “ Some Memorials of the Wiltshire Regi-
ment from its formation, in 1756, to the present time;” by the
Rev. H. T. Armrretp, F.S.A., on “The ancient Roof Paintings in
the choir of Salisbury Cathedral ;”’ and by the Rev. Canon Jonzs,
F.S.A., on “ A few Stray Notices of St. Osmund and his successors,
the Bishops of Old Sarum.” All of these papers will appear in the
Magazine, and therefore need not be farther alluded to here.
At the conclusion of the last paper, after thanking the authors of
them, the president said as this was the last occasion of the members
being assembled within the city, during this meeting, he would
suggest that they should give a hearty and cordial vote of thanks
to the Mayor of Salisbury for his kind reception and hospitality.
He would also hint to them the propriety of thanking the local
honorary secretaries, Mr. Swayne, Mr. Nightingale, and Mr. Stevens,
for their excellent generalship, and for the ability with which the ~
Second Conversazione. 41
arrangements had been carried out. To Mr. Stevens especially thanks
were due, and he trusted that during the excursions the members all
responded to the call of his whistle.
The votes of thanks were all carried by acclamation.
My. Srevens, in returning thanks, observed that more credit was
due to those who had accompanied him than to himself, as they all
responded so well to his call. He thanked all for the expression of
their goodwill.
Rev. A. C. Sutra said that, as that was the last formal meeting
of the Society which would be held, they could not separate without
thanking Sir John Lubbock for his kindness in coming down and
presiding over their gathering. He congratulated the Society on
having secured the-services of so competent an archzologist as their
President. His name was of European renown, and not only as an
archeologist, but. as a naturalist; and he would not have them
forget that this was a natural history as well as an archeological
society. The services which their president had rendered to ar-
cheology and to natural history were manifold, and they could not
forget that he was the author of the bill for the preservation of the
ancient monuments of the country. Moreover he felt sure that Sir
John Lubbock would not relax in his efforts to procure the passing
of that measure. Nor had their President contented himself with
words: he had also acted up to them; for it should not be forgotten
that their President had purchased part of the land on which Avebury
stood, and also Silbury Hill, for the purpose of preserving those
ancient relics. He begged to propose a vote of thanks to Sir John
for taking the chair, and for the admirable address which he had
delivered on the previous day.
The Prustpent returned thanks for the kind manner in which they
had received the mention of his name. He must confess that at
first he felt some degree of diffidence and nervousness in taking the
chair. They had, however, much enjoyed themselves, and they must
all feel that they had had a most pleasant gathering. He would
conclude by making one last suggestion, and that was that they
should accord a vote of thanks to the general secretaries of the
Society, who carried on the work, not only at the meetings, but
42 The Twenty-third General Meeting.
throughout the year, as well as conducted the Magazine, the Rev.
A. C. Smith, Mr. Cunnington, and Mr. Talbot.
The Rev. A. C. Sur briefly acknowledged the compliment.
The glee singers then gave some more part-songs, and the pro-
ceedings were brought to a close by the singing of the “ National
Anthem.”
THIRD DAY, FRIDAY, AUGUST 25ru.
THE “MOOT” EXCURSION.
Again a lovely day for a long excursion, and again each excursionist
was furnished with a second guide from the pen of the indefatigable
Mr. Stevens, also enriched with a map, wherein that able author
gave a series of “ jottings” on objects of historical and antiquarian
interest, to be met with on the route to and from the “ Moot” at
Downton; special attention being given to that remarkable earth-
work. Mr. Stevens too was again in command of the expedition,
and led the van. The excursionists, who were not so numerous as
on the previous day, left Salisbury punctually at nine, and passing’
through the Close, and along the Coombe Road, made the first halt
at Coombe Bissett Church, and thence to Bishopstone Church, where
they were cordially welcomed by the Ven. Archdeacon Lear, who,
addressing them from the Rectory lawn, in sight of the edifice,
called their special attention to its very beautiful, though peculiar,
and in some respects unique character. After a careful inspection
of this most interesting Church (for which see the remarks of Mr,
Talbot further on), Sir John Lubbock, in the name of the Society,
proposed a hearty vote of thanks to the Archdeacon, for the kind,
ready, and very valuable assistance he had rendered the Society, both
in his guidance on the first day over the Cathedral, and for his
welcome to Bishopstone. This was cordially endorsed by all present,
and then they drove through the valley to Odstock Church, the
more interesting features of which were pointed out by Mr. Talbot.
Refreshments were hospitably provided by the Rector of Odstock,
the Rev. P. E. Miles, for which the President expressed the hearty
thanks of the Society; and then they moved onward to Breamore
The “ Moot” Excursion. 43
House, where they were welcomed by Sir Edward Hulse, who con-
ducted them through the house, and explained many of the interesting
works of art and other articles of antiquarian value which it contains.
After enjoying the hospitality of Sir Edward, the party made a
brief visit to the extremely interesting and quaint little Church of
Breamore, which adjoins the house, and a hearty vote of thanks
having been awarded to Sir Edward, for his hospitality and kindness,
the journey was resumed, and about four o’clock “The Moot” was
reached by the archeologists. Adjoining the house of Mr. Squarey,
who gave the party a cordial welcome, a spacious marquee was
erected, in which an excellent luncheon awaited them. After this
the “ Moot” was thoroughly explored; and though numerous and
contradictory to one another were many of the opinions expressed,
and Mr. Stoprr, of Taunton, read a paper in support of his view
- that it was a Norman castle; (to which however the President
demurred, and most of the archeclogists agreed with him ;) all ac-
knowledged that it was an earthwork of no ordinary dimensions, and
a place of considerable interest; and all joined in the vote of thanks
which Sir John Lubbock proposed to Mr. and Mrs. Squarey, for the
cordiality with which they had received them, and pointed out the
remarkable features of this intricate earth-work ; which, whether a
fortification, or place of assembly, should undoubtedly rank amongst
our most remarkable monuments of antiquity in Wiltshire, and is
well worthy of the veneration and respect with which happily its
present owners regard it. A visit to the fine Church of Downton,
and the very interesting Church of Britford, with its remarkable
arches, apparently of Roman material, if not actual Roman work ;
and an inspection of the admirable, though small, collection of birds,
at the house of the Rev. A. P. Morres, brought the proceedings of
the meeting to a close; and we cannot but congratulate the Society
on this, the fullest attended, and perhaps the most interesting and
enjoyable of all the annual gatherings of that body ; while we feel
bound to add that it was to the admirable arrangements, the tact
and forethought and generalship of Mr. E. T. Stevens, that the
success of the meeting was mainly due.
44
ON A
Heaven “ Bulla,” found at Carminster.
Communicated by the Rey. JouHn Baron, M.A.
Wii HAVE the pleasure of recording the particulars of a Bulla
eo \ entrusted to me for inspection and illustration by my friend
and neighbour, Mr. H. P. Jones, of Portway House, Warminster.
It was found on the 3rd of March, 1871, beneath a terrace nine feet
high, which runs along the garden-front of Portway House, and
lying upon the face of an old road or path which, previously to the
formation of the terrace, appears to have run in a direction from
south-east to north-west, that is, at right angles to the present house
and terrace. It seems probable that the Bulla may have been shot
down upon this spot together with the earth brought thither to form
the terrace. By the term Bulla is here meant, not the classical
Bulla, or hollow ball of gold, which was worn by Roman youths as
a mark of patrician rank, but the ecclesiastical Bulla, or seal of lead,
having on one side the name of the reigning Pope, and, on the other,
the heads of St. Paul and St. Peter, which was attached to each of
those solemn letters of the Pope, and which, from the attachment of
such a seal, came to be called, in Latin, “ Bullae,” and in English,
** Pope’s Bulls.”
The Warminster Bulla is in good preservation, and, in general
features, is like others which I have seen described, and several of
various dates which I have personally inspected in the Musée Cluny,
at Paris, numbered in the catalogue, 2507. It is about the size and
thickness of an old-fashioned penny-piece, and, in the part of the
edge at the foot of the inscription on the obverse, and under the
chins of the heads on the reverse, are two pin-holes, about the eighth
of an inch apart, through which have passed the strings by which
the seal was attached to its document. It is said that in “ Bulls of
On a Leaden “ Bulla,’ found at Warminster. 45
Grace” the leaden seal was attached by silken cords, but in Bulls of
Justice by hempen strings. There are some interesting notices of
Bullae, both classical and ecclesiastical, in Notes and Queries.
Leaden Bulla found at Warminster.
The inscription on the obverse of the Warminster Bulla is
BONIFATIUS PP VIII. The F. is of that peculiar form
which prevailed in England in the fifteenth century, having a front
stroke like the trunk of an elephant. It is worthy of remark that
T stands in the place of the C of the modern spelling of the name.
Some perhaps may think this an evidence that “tius” as well as
“ejus” was pronounced by the Italians of the time nearly like “tshus,”
but it may also indicate that the name Bonifacius being derivable
from bonus, good, and facio, I do, or fari, to speak, may mean, speaker
of good words, (e.g., in documents authenticated by the seal,) as well
as “ doer of good deeds,” the ordinary interpretation. On the reverse
the heads of St. Paul and St. Peter are each surrounded by a beaded
line for a nimbus. St. Paul is represented on the left with a pointed
beard, and is distinguished by the superscription SPA., as an
abbreviation for Sanctus Paulus: St. Peter has a short round-shaped
beard, and has above his head the letters SPE., an abbreviation
for Sanctus Petrus. The lead is somewhat battered where the two
pin-holes are visible, and at the opposite edge. This may have been
purposely done in the endeavour to secure the suspending strings,
or it may be the result of accident.
- Pope Boniface the Ninth was elected A.D. 1889, and died at
Rome, A.D. 1404.
46 On a Leaden “ Bulla,’ found at Warminster.
It would be interesting to ascertain whether, in a collection of
Papal Bulls, eg., Bullarium Magnum Romanum, or elsewhere, any
Bull of Pope Boniface the Ninth is extant, which could be locally
connected with Warminster, or the immediate neighbourhood. Sir
Richard Colt Hoare, in his Hundred of Mere, quotes a Bull of this
Pope granted to the Priory of Maiden Bradley.
The name of the town Warminster is usually supposed to mean
the minster or monastery on the river Ware, which flows past the
parish Church of St. Denys. A “ Nunnery” formerly stood nearly
on the site of the present Manor House, near the said Church, and
Sir Richard Colt Hoare mentions that, when this nunnery was taken
down, about 1790, some old coins were found and a curious figure
of a pilgrim, of which he gives an engraving. Possibly some of the
earth for the formation of the above-mentioned terrace, at the bottom
of which the Bulla was found, may have been carted from the site
of the old Nunnery. The sloping path on the side of Warminster
Down is still called “ Nun’s Path.”
Unfortunately there is no mention of the Warminster Monastery
or Nunnery in Dugdale’s Monasticon, or Bishop Tanner’s Notitia
Monastica.
I have been favoured by the Rev. Prebendary Clerk, of Kingston
Deverill, with the sight of a beautiful silver coin of Pope Sixtus the
Fourth, elected A.D. 1471, died 1484. This coin has on the reverse
two highly-finished full-length figures of St. Paul and St. Peter, in
the same relative positions as the heads on the Bulla, and the same
distinction is observed in the shape of their beards.
I beg to send for the use of the Society; a fac-simile, in lead, of
the Warminster Bulla, with a photogram of obverse and reverse,
and also a photogram of the said coin as an illustration.
JoHn Baron.
Upton Scudamore Rectory,
22nd August, 1876.
47
Ampe Aobsart.
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A.*
story of “Amye Robsart,” having observed upon former
occasions, as now on this, that our Annual Meetings are honoured by
the presence of many ladies: and though no one of them has hitherto
stood boldly forward on the .platform to demand “ Woman’s archa-
ological Rights,” still those rights exist, and should not be neglected.
If the ladies are so kind as to listen to our more substantial disser-
tations, it is simply just, that they should be presented in turn with
variety of entertainment agreeable to lighter appetites.
But how is Amye Robsart possibly to be connected with the
archeology of Wiltshire?
In the first place: her story is certainly archxological, because it
is very obscure ; besides being to a certain extent of national interest,
‘occupying as it does a rather conspicuous place in the domestic
history of the reign of Queen Elizabeth.
In the next, though, strictly speaking, it belongs to Berkshire,
and has been investigated with much pains by antiquaries of that
county, it is nevertheless open to elucidation from any other quarter,
If then we have found any thing in our county of Wilts, to
throw a little light upon it, Berkshire neighbours will not object :
nor will a Wiltshire audience. I do not pretend to clear up the
mystery entirely: but certainly am able to tell something about it,
which nobody ever knew before. Some of the ladies present will
very likely not thank me for any new discovery, preferring to abide
by established illusions. Not that they would feel any real pleasure
in riveting a fearful crime on Lord Robert Dudley’s memory: but
“Amye Robsart” is so touching, so pathetic a story as it stands,
hs HAVE chosen for the subject of my paper this evening the
* Read at the Meeting of the Wiltshire Archeological Society, at ree Wednesday evening,
23rd August, 1876,
48 Amye Robsart.
that they do not like to be robbed of it, Of the more horrible part,
as commonly believed, it has indeed been long since deprived,
and the more we can arrive at the real facts the better: because,
though Great Britain is in itself very small, it is, in its name and
influence, one of the most important countries in the world. Its
history will be read more and more, as our language spreads: so
that it seems only a duty on the part of those who have the means,
to put our historical characters into as respectable a form as possible.
This may, partly, be done by using secret history to remove the
false impressions produced by historical novels.
“ Amy Robsart” has obtained a world-wide celebrity, in Sir
Walter Scott’s novel of “ Kenilworth.” To say a word against so
extraordinary a man may seem presumptuous: nevertheless it has
been said, both of him and others, that historical novels are mortal
foes to history, and most assuredly, never did any work of that kind so
utterly confuse and contradict facts as does Sir Walter’s“ Kenilworth.”
It has also been stated that some of his most famous novels are
losing their popularity ; because, after the pleasing impression with
which they were at first received has passed away, and Time has
revealed that they are untrue and impossible, they naturally fall ito
some discredit. In our earlier days we devour such things. After-
wards, they become indigestible, simply because ,the history is so
grossly perverted as to become almost ridiculous. You may say,
“ Well, but it is only a story, a novel,” and that “ novel-writers
are not tied to strict veracity.” The answer is, “If your per-
sonages and events are altogether fictitious, it does not in the least
signify what they do or say; but if they are conspicaous figures in
our national history, and they are made to say and do things which
they not only never did, but which it is absolutely impossible that
they ever could have done, and if the style is attractive and the in-
cidents striking, this will leave upon the public mind, both at home
and abroad, an impression which perhaps will never be effaced. Such
misrepresentation is surely to be regretted.” “ Kenilworth” has
been translated into many foreign languages, and probably every
person who has read it, has ever afterwards lived under the fullest
belief, not only that Amye Robsart died in the horrible manner
a
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, P.S.A. 49 ,
described, but that her death was directly sanctioned, at any rate
connived at, by her husband, then Lord Robert Dudley, afterwards
the celebrated Earl of Leicester.
I must just refresh your memory with one or two circumstances.
On the death of King Edward VI., 6th July, 1553, John Dudley,
first, Earl of Warwick, and then Duke of Northumberland, tried to
put his own family on the throne by bringing forward: Lady Jane
Grey, whom he had married to one of his sons, Lord Guilford Dudley.
Lord Robert Dudley was another of his sons : and Lord Robert was
not only concerned in that plot, but is generally believed to have
inherited his father’s ambition, and to have had an eye to the throne
himself as the husband of Queen Elizabeth. Having this object in
view he was charged by certain writers with having stopped at
nothing ; with having contrived poisonings, assassinations, and every
kind of villainy. “If,” says an author of later times (Dr. Drake)
“ he was guilty of half of what ‘memoirs’ charge him with, or even
what foreign historians mention, he must have been master of greater
cunning than any minister that this nation ever produced, either
before or since, not only to have defended himself, but to have
maintained his power and greatness to the last, under such an accumu-
lation of guilt and envy.”
Now I am under no sort of obligation, and am in no way con-
cerned to be the champion of Robert Dudley, the celebrated Earl of
Leicester, against all comers: and whether other accusations against
him are true or false, does not come within the range of the present
paper. It simply deals with some fresh evidence in ove particular
case, as supplied by certain documents at Longleat, which by the
Marquis of Bath’s kind permission are now lying on the table, open
to your inspection.!
Before we believe any of the stories in circulation against Lord
Robert Dudley it is only fair to ask, Who were the authors of those
stories? As a general answer, they were his enemies in politics or
in religion. This is clear from the fact of so many atrocities being
raked together and put forth in all the bitterness that language could
? These will be found printed in the Appendix to this paper.
VOL. XVII.—NO. XLIX, E
50 Amye Robsart.
supply. To keep to my point; what are the authorities upon which
Sir Walter Scott based his popular novel of Kenilworth? He tells
us himself. The first is Mickle’s very beautiful ballad, which begins:
‘¢ The dews of summer night did fall,
The Moon, sweet Regent of the sky,
Silver’d the walls of Cumnor Hall,
And many an oak that grew thereby.”
His other authority (as stated by himself, at the end of the novel,
when first published) was “ Ashmole’s Antiquities of Berkshire :”
and, he adds, “ the story is alluded to in many other works which
treat of Leicester’s history.” As Sir Walter says nothing about
having taken any trouble to inquire into the truth or probability of
it, I suppose he believed it to be true. In a later edition of Sir
‘Walter’s novels there is a preface to Kenilworth, written by I know
not whom, but it would seem by himself, in which (his novel having
from the first encountered some censure) he qualifies the matter
thus: “If we can trust ‘Ashmole’s Antiquities of Berkshire’ there
was but too much ground for the tradition which charges Leicester
with the murder of his wife.” He then gives Ashmole’s narrative
at length.t
Ashmole’s so-called “ Antiquities of Berkshire” is one of the most
meagre of publications: he died 1692, one hundred and thirty-two
years after Amye Robsart’s death. His book was not published by
himself, and consists of very little more than notes of epitaphs in
Berkshire Churches which he had visited, and which notes were
found among his papers, and were printed after his death. Among
them was also found the story of Amye’s death: but it had been
merely copied from another authority. That other authority was a
much older one called “ Leicester’s Commonwealth.” This was one
of the most virulent compilations that ever was put together, and
1 Several writers upon this Cumnor story, copying one from another, have
named our old Wiltshire friend, John Aubrey, as the author of the tale which
Ashmole copied. I have not been able to find a single word about it in Aubrey’s
MSS. He has preserved many anecdotes and “on dits” of his own day: and
many that came down to him by tradition ; but for this he is not answerable—
so far as I know.
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.8.A. 51
was written, it was said, by Father Parsons, the Jesuit: at least if
not by himself, by himself and company. It was circulated only in
MS. for many years, but upon being printed in 1584, four years
before Dudley’s death, was publicly proclaimed by the Privy Council
to be an infamous and scandalous libel. . Such (to trace things to
their source) is the authority on which “ Kenilworth” is founded.
To recapitulate, for a moment or two, the outlines of the novel.
Dudley, having married Amye Rebsart early in life, afterwards finds
the marriage inconvenient, so puts her away under vigilant and
designing villains, Tony Foster and Varney, who understood that
they were to get rid of her somehow. But, says this most veracious
historical novel, after she became “ Countess of Leicester,” hearing
of Queen Elizabeth’s visit to Kenilworth Castle, and the splendid
entertainment going on there, all significant of Dudley’s future
nuptials with the Queen, the “ Countess of Leicester ”’ escapes from
Cumnor, arrives in a sort of disguise at Kenilworth Castle, and
has a touching interview with the Queen, who falls into a furious
passion upon finding that the Earl of Leicester was married. It is
not worth while to go into detail, but Amye is persuaded by Leicester
to return to Cumnor, he promising to come and see her as soon as
the Revels are over. So to Cumnor poor Amye returns, attended
by the two villains, who presently dispose of her in the horrible
manner with which the tale concludes. She is shut up in an isolated
tower, which is approached only by a narrow drawbridge. Midway
in the floor of the drawbridge is a trap-door, so contrived that the
first person who should step upon it would be precipitated into what
the novelist describes as a “sable gulph, an abyss dark as pitch and
profoundly deep.” After a certain time the villain Varney, pre-
tending to arrive as the expected husband, rides into the court-yard,
dismounts, gives the husband’s peculiar call—a whistle—Amye
rushes out, steps on the trap-door—and all is over. ‘ Look down
into the vault,” says Varney to Foster, “what seest thou?” “I
see only a heap of white clothes, like a snow-drift,” said Foster,
“Oh God! she moves her arm!” “ Hurl something down upon
her. Thy gold chest, Tony, it is a heavy one.”
A more thrilling narrative never was penned. Founded upon this
E2
52 Amye Robsart.
tale we have had several kinds of public spectacles. There was the
melodrama of “ Amy Robsart,” performed for a whole season before
thousands upon thousands. It has been, I am told, repeated at the
Polytechnic, in Dissolving views! ‘There is also a French play, for
the edification of our neighbours, to teach them, I suppose, the facts
of English History. Now, spectacles of this kind, got up with
every sort of effective dramatic scenery, make an impression upon
the sight-seeing mind which is never forgotten. If 100,000 people
saw the interview between Amye Robsart and Queen Elizabeth re-
presented on the London stage, upon the authority of the great
Sir Walter Scott; well—I am sorry to undeceive them—but most
certain it is, that they shed their tears, and paid their money, all
for nothing: for no such interview ever took place. But against
100,000 who “ saw it and paid for it,’ what chance or opportunity
has Truth to put in a word ?
Sir Walter Scott’s gross anachronisms, 7.¢., his confusion and mis-
placing of dates, events, and persons, were of course immediately
noticed by critics at the time of the publication of his novel: and
since that time, several writers, especially Mr. Bartlett, of Abingdon,
the late Mr. Pettigrew, a well-known archeologist, and still later,
Mr. Adlard, of New York, have pointed out a great many ex-
aggerations and false statements in the received account of Amye’s
death ; and have defended Dudley against the charge of causing her
to be murdered. But whilst thousands see the false history on the
stage, not one in a thousand ever hears of the correction. Mr.
Pettigrew’s paper on the subject was read before the British Archzo-
logical Society, in 1859, and was printed separately. In his account,
as well as in the others, are some points, on which I can now supply
a little information that is quite new.
I will therefore briefly touch upon a few points in the story, just
to shew the difference between the current belief and the real facts.
My proofs are the documents now lying on the table.
1.—Tue Marrtiace.
Owing to the confusion of romance and history the real facts are
scarcely distinct. I have been asked, “ Was Amye the lawful wife
of Lord Robert Dudley?” Of that there is no doubt. She was
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A. 53
the only daughter and heir (her brother Arthur, mentioned afterwards
being illegitimate) of Sir John Robsart, a knight of Norfolk, of
lineage older than that of the Dudley family.' Her mother, Lady
Robsart, had been married before, to a Mr. Appleyard, of a very old
Norwich family : and by him she had a son John Appleyard, Amye’s
half-brother, whose name I beg you to bear in mind. Robert Dudley,
«Esquyer,” and Amye were married when quite young (she about
18, and he about 19 years of age) in A.D. 1550, fourth year of
King Edward VI. The proofs of their marriage are these. There
is among the Records in London a settlement on the dady’s side, by
Sir John Robsart, the father, dated 15th May 1550. There is at
Longleat a deed of settlement on the husband’s side: which document
I now produce (Appendix I.). It is dated 24th May, 1550: and
runs thus: “Between John, Earl of Warwick, K.G., of the one
part, and Sir John Robsart, Kt., on the other part: witnesseth that
they are fully agreed that a marriage shortly after the ensealing
hereof, shall be had and solemnized between Robert Duddeley, Esq.,
one of the younger sons of the said Erle, and Amye Robsart, daughter
and heir apparaunte to the said Sir John Robsart, if the said Robarte
and Amye will thereunto condiscend and agree : ” and then continues,
about lands, &c. These two documents were settlements, in May,
1550, on the intended marriage. The marriage itself took place on
4th June, 1550, at Sheen, in Surrey, in the presence of the Court:
and King Edward VI., then only eleven years old, who kept a little
diary (now preserved in the British Museum), mentions it, and has
‘also added a peculiar performance among the festivities ‘of the oc-
ecasion, which seems to have particularly taken his juvenile fancy.
©1550. June 4. Sir Robert Dudeley, third sonne to th’ Erle of
Warwick, maried S. Jon. Robsartes daughter, after wich mariage,
ther were certain gentlemen that did strive who shuld first take away
a goose’s head which was hanged alive on two cross posts.” The
marriage was therefore not in any way clandestine, but public and
‘notorious as possible.
1 She is believed to have been born at Stansfield Hall, Norfolk, a house which
belonged to her father, and which some years ago obtained a horrible notoriety
from being the scene of the murder of the Jermyn Family by Rush.
54 Amye Robsart.
There are at Longleat several documents dated after the marriage
in which they are both mentioned : but I did not think it necessary
to bring them all. One only is here, being a grant of the manor
of Hemsby, near Yarmouth, in Norfolk, by his father, John, then
Duke of Northumberland, to his son, Lord Robert Dudley, and “the
Lady Amie his wife.” (Appendix II).
Their married life lasted rather more than ten years, from 4th
June, 1550, to 8th September, 1560. The few particulars of it
recovered from these papers will be mentioned presently. We return
to the difference between the received story and the real facts.
2.—AMYE NEVER AT KENILWORTH.
It was mentioned just now that thousands of worthy sight-seers
have paid their money and shed their tears, over the touching in-
terview between the “Countess of Leicester ’’ and Queen Elizabeth
atKenilworth—all for nothing : simply because no such interview ever
took place—except at Covent Garden Theatre. The reason is, that
Kenilworth Castle where the Earl received the Queen, did not belong
to him at all during Amye’s life. She died 1560. The Queen gave
Kenilworth to “Lord Robert” in June 1563. Sir Walter Scott might
have easily known that from Warwickshire county history. The
original Letters Patent, dated 20th June, 1563, by which the Queen
gave it, are at Longleat : a very fine deed illuminated with a portrait
of Queen Elizabeth and flowered border, but it is very large and long,
and beyond the limits of a carpet bag. I have however brought an
equally sufficient evidence: which is the Original Warrant from the
Queen to deliver to Dudley possession of the Castle. (Appendix VIL.)
This is an interesting document: being Queen Elizabeth’s authority
to six gentlemen, named, to go to Kenilworth, and take possession
on behalf of Lord Robert. The formal delivery is endorsed, dated
29th June, and it is attested by the signatures of no less than sixty--
four witnesses. One may easily conceive that half the town of
Kenilworth would pour out, with the laudable desire of seeing
their fine old castle handed over to the great favourite of the day.
But where was Amye? She had been in her grave nearly three
years, since September, 1560.
By the Rev. Canon J. EF. Jackson, F.8.A. 55
8.—AmyE NEVER “Countess or LEICESTER.” ©
For the same reason, she never was, as Scott calls her, ‘ Coun-
tess of Leicester :”? Dudley not having been created Earl of Leicester
until after the grant of Kenilworth Castle. The patent of creation
is dated 29th September, 1563, rather more than three years after
her death. During her life he was “ Sir R. Dudley, Kt., commonly
ealled Lord Robert;” and she “ Amye, Dame or Lady, Dudley.”
4.—Sim Ricuarp VARNEY.
I come next to speak of the delusion about “ Varney,” one of the
leading “ villains” of the novel. In the melodrama of “ Amy Rob-
sart,” this worthy appears in the costume of a brigand, wrapped up
in the regulation bandit cloak, with his arms folded, and a most sinister
countenance duly provided with dark eye-brows and piercing eyes.
He is placed at a further corner of the stage, scowling askance at
his poor victim, as if he were thirsting for the moment to spring,
like a tiger, upon her. It must be exquisitely ridiculous to any
person knowing the truth to sit and see such nonsense. An arche-
ologist, looking round upon the spectators, would sigh with pity for
the hundreds of simple folk who watch the proceedings with the
deepest interest, not having the slightest idea that they are gulled
and misled by the whole representation. Well, but what is the
real history of Varney, the scowling brigand in the regulation cloak ?
The late Mr. Pettigrew, in the pamphlet to which I have referred,
says: “ Of Sir Richard Varney I can ascertain no particulars. He
is mentioned, in no measured terms, as an instigator to baseness, as
the chief prompter to the murderous design, and as having been left
with a manservant, an underling, and Anthony Foster, to effect the
diabolical business. We know nothing of Varney, save the mention
of him in Ashmole’s narrative, drawn by the Jesuit in ‘ Leicester’s
Commonwealth, and by the very important part he is made to play
in the novel of Kenilworth. His name does not occur in any au-
thentic documents connected with Sir Robert Dudley or Amye
Robsart, nor, indeed, does he appear to have had any real existence.” }
- 1The italics are so marked by myself
56 Amye Robsart.
Here Mr. Pettigrew was at fault. I discovered among the papers
at Longleat a letter dated from Warwick, 20th April, 1560 (six
months before Amye’s death), addressed “ To the Rt. honourable and
my verry good lorde, the lorde Robert Dudley, Mr. of th’ horses to
the Quene’s Majestie at Court,” signed “ Ricnarp VERNEY.”
The name, of course, caught my attention; and the next thing
was to find out, if possible, something about the writer. The letter
itself was of the common kind from one friend and gentleman to
another; referring to the loss of some favourite hawks of Dudley’s
which had been entrusted’ to the care of one of the writer’s ser-
vants, and which had been unfortunately mismanaged. So there was
nothing to help me in the letter itself. But luckily the sea/, not in
wax but on wafer, was preserved, and the device was an antelope with
long horns. On examining it closely with a glass, I observed that the
animal’s ¢a7/ ended not with the usual single tuft of hair, but in a
tripartite finish, something like a fleur-de-lis. The letter being dated
from Warwick, I immediately turned to Dugdale’s History of that
county, and found on reference to the name of Verney, an engraved
plate of a monumental coat of arms, the two supporters to which were
two antelopes with the peculiar tripartite caudal finish. At Longleat
is a parchment deed signed by the same Richard Verney,where the seal
is preserved in wax, and presents the same peculiarity. This identified
the family of the writer of the letter, who, in short, turned out to be
Sir Richard Verney, of Compton Verney, in Warwickshire, a family
now represeuted, and place occupied by his descendant, Lord Wil-
loughby de Broke. Lord Robert Dudley himself was a Warwickshire
man. He had already property in that county (before Kenilworth
was given to him), from his father: and Sir Richard Verney was a
neighbour and friend, of whom I am not able to discover any thing
but what is perfectly respectable. For example, I produce a letter
to Lord Robert Dudley, Master of the Queen’s Horse, from Sir
Ambrose Cave, one of the Queen’s Ministers, and M.P. for Co.
Warwick, written 16th July, 1559, a year before Amye’s death.
Certain commissioners were wanted for the county:: and Sir Ambrose,
writing in the name of the Council, says: “ And whereas for the
execution of the charge committed unto us we resolved of certain
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A. 57
gentlemen to be officers unto us as Mr. Fisher for one who cannot
well take it upon him, in whose stead Sir Richard Varney a gentle-
man meet to serve in that behalf, wold willingly endeavour himself +
for Warwickshire, if it plese you to appoint or require him by your
letters to take the chardge upon him. Thus leaving to trouble your
Ldship any further at this tyme I commit you to God who send you
increase of honour. Your good Lordships to command, Ambrose
Cave.” This is scarcely the vein in which a Minister of State
would write about a brigand in a cloak, waiting to stain his hands
in a miserable murder.
In tie novel you will recollect, that Varney is disposed of in a
manner that is no doubt highly satisfactory to the reader. He is
found next morning dead in his cell: having swallowed a dose of
poison. That of course was, what it should have been, but not as
it was. For behold, next year, 1561 (the year after her death), this
same scowling brigand in the cloak, who had been found dead in
his cell, is filling the dignified office of Her Majesty’s High Sheriff
for the county of Warwick. He survived the “ poison ” seven years,
dying 26th July, 1567.
4.—Tony Foster.
I have now another character to introduce, with whom you are no
doubt most accurately acquainted by the help of Sir Walter Scott.
What is your opinion, Ladies, of Tony Foster? He is described as
a cruel hard-hearted miserly curmudgeon, so clumsily built as to
border on deformity. He also has keen dark eyes and rugged brows,
with a most unprepossessing countenance, is dressed in leather,
1 « To endeavour himself for ;” %.¢., to consider himself bound, to undertake
for. So in the Prayer Book, collect for Second Sunday after Easter, ‘‘ also daily
endeavour ourselves:” in the Preface to the Confirmation service, ‘‘ they will
evermore endeavour themselves,” and in the Ordination service, ‘‘I will en-
deavour myself so to do.” In all these instances in the Prayer Book the words
are often read with a pause between ‘‘ endeavour” and ‘‘ themselves,” as if the
meaning were that they would—‘' themselves, do their best,” &c. The mistake
isa very pardonable one, the modern use of the word endeavour being simply
‘*to try.” Nor is there in the English translation of the Bible any other sense
of the word. It is in the Prayer Book only that the obsolete use is retained.
58 Amye Robsart.
with a long knife on one side and a cutlass on the other: in short, a
compound of jailer, hangman and butcher. He too, meets with his
reward in a way that is quite charming. ‘ When the alarm was
given, the murderers fled and Tony wholly disappeared. Many
years afterwards, in making some researches about Cumnor Hall,
the eldest son and heir [who, by the way, never existed] discovered
a secret passage closed by an iron door, descending to a cell: in
which they found an iron chest containing a quantity of gold, and a
human skeleton stretched above it. The fate of Anthony Foster
was now manifest. He had fled to this place of concealment, for-
getting the key of the spring-lock : and being barred from escape,
he had there perished miserably. The groans and screams which
had been heard were not wholly imaginary, but were those of this
wretch who in his agony, was crying for relief and succour.” So
half the world believes to this day. Now for the real facts. —
Anthony Forster, or Forrester, Esq., was of an old Shropshire
family, settled in Berkshire. His wife was Ann, neice of Lord
Williams of Thame, Lord High Chamberlain in the reign of Philip
and Mary. Mr. Forster rented Cumnor Hall of the Owen family,
to whom it belonged, and was tenant of it at the time of Amye
Robsart’s death, but purchased it soon after. His children all died.
He was highly esteemed as a most honest gentleman, by his neigh-
bours at Abingdon. He was sometimes sent for by the University
of Oxford to assist in settling matters of controversy. He was a
cultivator of the fine arts, a musician, a builder, a planter, and to-
wards the close of his life was returned to Parliament for the Borough
of Abingdon. In Cumnor Church there is a large brass plate to
his memory, a rubbing of which I now exhibit. It has, from the
accompaniment of coats of arms all the marks of gentility. He had
always been a personal friend of Lord Robert Dudley’s and when
Dudley was promoted to great honour, Mr. Forster was not only the
principal receiver of his income, but was one of the chief controllers
of the expense of a very stately and magnificent establishment. For
with all his magnificence, the Earl of Leicester’s household and
other expenses were kept in the most precise and careful. manner,
At Longleat, there are some of the Inventories of his furniture,
By the Rev. Canon J. EB. Jackson, F.8.A. 59
dresses, &c., in large folio volumes, beautifully written. All bills
were duly examined, and payments registered. Among many of
similar kind I show one which is simply a butcher’s account : but it
is drawn out almost with the solemnity of a State paper, and signed
by five of the household officers. (Appendix, VIII.)
The Earl was remarkable for his costly wardrobe. The practise was,
for the materials to be supplied to the taylor, or embroiderer, by the
mercer or other tradesman. The orders to the tradesmen were all
issued by the chief officer of the wardrobe: and I now exhibit to
you out of a box at Longleat a bundle of such orders, filed exactly
as they were left by Mr. Forster. (Appendix,IX.) Every one of
these is signed by Anthony Forster, in the year 1566, 2.¢., six years
after the said Tony had been starved to death and had been found
in the very uncomfortable position of a skeleton stretched upon an
iron chest in a secret cell at Cumnor Hall.
I have also an original letter (Appendia, X.) from the Earl of
Leicester to A. Forster, relating to furniture at Kenilworth Castle:
containing special orders about costly hangings for the dining-
chamber, specifying the very width;and height ; with directions for
- sufficient store of spicery and fireworks against “ my chiefest day :”
also instructions for a banqueting room to be got up quickly, with
peremptory orders for all to be on the alert. It ends: “ So fare you
well, Antony; in much haste, your loving Master, R. Leycester.”
I thought at first this letter referred to the preparations for the great
reception of Queen Elizabeth ; but that was in 1575: and A. Forster
had died in 1569. It refers to a visit of Sir Nicholas Bacon, the
Lord Keeper of the Great Seal. The precise year is not important,
but whenever it was, here we have our skeleton Tony alive and well,
and clothing his bare bones with the good things of Kenilworth
Castle, several years after, to our great satisfaction, we had heard
him screaming himself to death in the dungeon at Cumnor Hall!
Having now shewn you in a few instances how widely the current
belief differs from the real facts, I come to grapple with the main
part of the story. I must ask you to dismiss from your minds alto-
‘gether the title of Earl of Leicester, and the name of Kenilworth,
60 Amye Robsart.
because doth were utterly unknown to Amye Robsart. We must |
go back, if you please, to the beginning of her. married life, 1550,
which (as already said) lasted for ten years.
All the older narratives have begun with telling us that their
married life was an unhappy one: and one of our historians says
that they lived apart and she in a lonely house. That is just the
way to prepare the reader’s mind for a violent conclusion : but where
is the evidence that their married life was from the first, or indeed
ever, an unhappy one? ‘There was absolutely none : for until a very
little while ago, nothing whatever was known about their married
life. The little we do know will, as I hope to prove, exhibit them
as living on the best footing. And as to their living apart, and she
in a lonely house, that also shall be explained. It only applies to
the last year or two, and the house was anything but lonely. Where
they first lived is not known. Perhaps in Norfolk, where their
property lay: possibly in London, because this was in Edward the
Sixth’s time, and Lord Robert was one of the Gentlemen in ordinary
in the Household. After Edward the Sixth’s death, July, 1553,
Dudley certainly was in London, but against his will and under un-
pleasant circumstances: for he had joined (as mentioned above) in
the attempt to place Lady Jane Grey on the throne: for which Queen
Mary sent him to the Tower. He was convicted of high treason ;
all his estates, wife’s and all, were forfeited: and he had a very
narrow escape from sharing his father’s fate on Tower Hill. The
Princess Elizabeth (afterwards Queen) was at the same time lodged
in the Tower by her sister, Queen Mary, for State reasons. Robert
Dudley remained in custody half-a-year, till January, 1554. Several
other noblemen of his party were also prisoners: but their wives
were allowed to visit them from time to time. Among the ladies
whose names are mentioned as so doing, is that of Amye, Lady
Dudley: so that, so far, in the fourth year of marriage, there is no
sign of estrangement. On receiving his pardon, he was released,
and his estates, including his wife’s, were restored to him. This was
through the influence of Philip of Spain, the husband of Queen
Mary: in return for which Robert Dudley offered his services to
Philip, who sent him off to the Continent to fight against the French.
Letter trom Amye (ko bsart) Lady Dudley. tp MM? “Flowerdew
abou . selling Wool, Ab 4 Sydisterne, @ Norfolk: [Heart VS AZ, f
Dwr Bs J vr 2 y £ on ige |
pales: : es ee awe of
oa pans y $2 ef 2 fr prem [oe > af [feo {
es ie Gjenft Z a a
hEGare< f Pape fy mowe We L5° a : ae
brb Seppare ug Gee Ayn fae fr GO wo :
off-t Bee Coyd ule e Lge lije® td 4 Ae
Ge e fn Seppantong/ yk nol cS > fiarcDy cy, ues
woe Be 7” JE oe ;
ge acoféomr fey 2 fare fovea f ye Loy
e Ff ane Ye y aAneyv” wor
(Epa i .
fue ¢. Ney yor a ‘Sp fe aes sy are 4 ab fost
ra] } ane ee 4 fe C a ot ae wUar Ae wet
fi ray OW We tory & MEE a) |
mather at of any, gee oven fye ae Proc zen fo = \ }
Cy AMG ve [oryny BESS frvder ps ypue~ revit l nacak | ~
[ule oft e~ * Wolle fp pore ab es ple Aa al bGove !
7 a [ie ye fos v4) Ge Res :
oF ag your Awl 8-—|
ft Al fe pow [calf (ie a args Corde ah hate
Aa ee wt af Gb Se marhy fo fe Goff
+" + a f A} ra i Ae f € 7 prt)
ro ame [42 pee a €Ge arse Z ; ERS Gene pea
hina \ By Seperady x4 Sie vf veGerfore f eee aro ea
/ < Cc >
f }
Piftew ears
)
A & FOE Coff* Gaby 6 |
aty {TY te,
< co Cc
Covhch Spor e [s to [ia oo en ee fo
Poff { Gee (a
fo Covdor~ by gape ee bre cs fo __
Wher 4
ye ese CovQ— GatlGe ye Yous oes oe t
C, Gr a er ks oe
ee
& e Nes u scisete fGe raf!
nee Dadae wove
[ely F veal mor |
forse. ase a ed r<qryte| Gen ot ne aA
Ff ely ay Vol ~ AS ena
He 5 (ENLEZ Mes If bo go
fone ey ee {7 }
sap Pomme Me Gayl aga oy of
TS. wy cary frye § su your tree BA ie ased
|
J Fé nee He ep rrryk Yee
OVOCT (w ( :
re Powe Gy Se ee a
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S8.A. 61
How long he was abroad I know not: but his wife would of
necessity be left at home. We lose sight of them entirely for three
years, if not more, but at the end of that time she re-appears: in a
letter written from herself, which for a long time was the only one
known to be in existence.
That letter is preserved in the British Museum (Harl. MS. 4712).
[A fac-simile isannexed.] It refers only to a comparatively trifling
matter, but it is really very useful in revealing to us, most in-
artificially, what her domestic position was in the seventh or eighth
year of marriage. It is dated 7th August, no year being named :
but as it refers to their farm at Sydisterne, in Norfolk, it could
not have been written before 1557, because that property did
not come into their hands (as is known from deeds) before that year.
I think however that it must have been written still later, and in the
first or second year of Queen Elizabeth, 1558 and 1559: because it
speaks of Dudley’s being called away on weighty business. The
substance of it is this: Sydisterne was a large sheep-farm with
3000 sheep upon it: and their agent or steward was a Mr.
Flowerdew. He had written to Dudley about some of the farm
affairs, and particularly about some poor people who were waiting for
some money. Lord Robert had been called off in a hurry, without
answering that letter: so the steward writes a second time, and the
second letter comes into Amye’s hands. She sends a courteous
apology to the agent for his first not having been answered, explains
the reason, and having full authority to settle ail matters, she orders
him to sell some wool, even at a loss, so as not to keep the poor
people waiting any longer for their money.!
1Tn order to assist the reader in deciphering the fac-simile the text of it is
subjoined :— :
‘Mr. flowardue I yndarstand by gryse * yt you put
hym in remembreance of y* you spake to me of
consaruing y*goying of sertayne shepe at systorne / &
althowe I forgot to moue my lorde therof before
his departyng he beyng sore trubeled wt wayty
affares / & I not beyng all to gether in quyet for
his soden departyng yet not w‘ standyng knowing
ay Grise was a steward, whose name appears in the account books, He had ceased to be so, before
22nd December, 1559,
62 Amye Robsart,
Now it is a perfectly fair question to ask, Is there any sign of
estrangement between husband and wife in the contents of this letter
of Amye’s? There is none at all. On the contrary, is it every wife
your acostomed fryndshype towardes my lorde
& me / [Some words erased, now illegible. | I nether may nor
can deney you y* requeste in my lordes absence
of myne owne awtoryte ye & ytwar A gretar
matter / as if any good occasyon may serve you so
trye me deseyryng you furdar y* you wyll make
salle of y® wolle so sone as ys possyble althowe
you sell yt for Vs. the stone or as you wolde
sell for your sealf for my lorde so ernystly
requered me at his departyng to se thosse pore
men satysfyed as thowe yt had bene A matter
dependyng uppon lyff wherfore I force not to
sustayne A lyttell losse therby to satysfy my
lordes desyer & so to send yt mony to
grysses house to london by _ brydwell to
whom my lorde hathe gewen order for
y° pamente therof / & thus I ende all waye
trobelyng you / wyssyng y* occasyon maye
serve me to requyte you untyll yt time /
I must pay you wt thankes / & so to god
I leve you frome M* heydes this vij of :
Awguste
Your assured duryng
. [Addressed] lyff AmyE DuUDDLEY.”
“To my veary frynd
M:. flowerdwe the
ellder gewe this.” *
* Mr. Adland of New York, who wrote a volume about Amye Robsart, appears (p. 23) to doubt
whether the letter in the British Museum, about Sydisterne (the only one which had been seen by
him) was really in her own handwriting, even as to the signature: simply because the name is
spelled ‘* Duddley,” and not ‘‘ Duddeley,”’ as her husband, and (as Mr. Adlard says) ‘* all the rest of
the family,’’ wrote it. But all the rest of the family did not do so. Some did and some did not,
There are examples of both at Longleat, and in page 105 of his own book Mr. Adlard gives a letter
from John, the father of Lord Robert, who writes himself, ‘‘ Dudley.’”? Names were not spelled
uniformly in those days, even by members of the same family. Sir Henry, father of Sir Philip,
writes ‘‘Sydney:’’ the son, “Sidney.’? In the Pembroke family one Earl writes himself ‘* Pen-
broke.’? Mr. Adlard admits the letter to be original, but probably written by a clerk or secretary,
signature and all, That all was certainly written by one and the same person is evident upon close
examination, The capital A in the signature of the Longleat letter is the same used in the word
*‘as” in the second line. The ‘ty ” and ‘‘d” of the signature also correspond with those used in
the body of the letter. It seems rather straining a point to suppose that the wife of Lord Robert
Dudley could not write her own name: and if she wrote that, she certainly wrote the whole letter.
The handwriting has, it is true, the look of such as might be used by an amanuensis, bred in
an office. It may have been so: but it should be remembered that the handwriting of ladies in for-
mer times was as unlike as possible to that ofour own time. It was large and masculin e. See, for
example, in “ Phillips’s Autograph Album,” at p. 39, the writing of Margaret of Lancaster; at p.
226, that of Anne Boleyn; both quite of the same style as Amye Robsart’s, King Henry VIII.
(p. 226) and others also, used the same character,
By the Rev. Canon J. B. Jackson, ¥.S.A. 63
who would venture to sell the wool, even at a loss, in her husband’s
absence? I trow not. So that I claim the evidence of poor Amye’s
letter as proving that she was a good managing trustworthy little
wife, and that the much abused Lord Robert Dudley, so far from
being estranged from her, left her at full discretion to deal with
domestic matters when he was away: and this, please to remember,
in the seventh or eighth year of their short married life of ten years.
But I have not done with this letter. It is dated, not from any
place in Norfolk, nor from London: but from “ Mr. Hyde’s,” with-
out saying where that was; which of itself implies that the steward
to whom it was written knew well enough. Now this Mr. Hyde’s
house was at Denchworth, a few miles from Abingdon in Berkshire,
and not many miles from Cumnor, though, observe, that with Cumnor
they have had nothing to do yet. Mr. Hyde’s brother, William,
was at this time M.P. for the Borough of Abingdon: so that there
is no doubt of the respectability of this family. Now I find, and
will prove to you, that Amye, Lady Dudley, resided a great deal at
this Mr. Hyde’s: and was constantly visited there by her husband,
coming and going to and fro: which throws a light upon the state
of affairs.
Queen Elizabeth had come to the throne, 17th November, 1558:
when Robert Dudley’s star was in the ascendant. He had been
nobody in Queen Mary’s reign: but he was of the same side as
Elizabeth in matters of religion: he had been her playfellow in
childhood and her fellow-prisoner in the Tower. She immediately
appointed him Master of the Horse, and K.G. This in the first
year of her reign. The office of Master of the Horse was one which
demanded his continual attendance in London. No one journeyed
about morethan Queen Elizabeth, and, go where she would, the Master
of the Horse was obliged to go with her. If you refer to the published
accounts of the Queen’s Progresses, there is always a great horseback
_ cavalcade, and the Master of the Horse, in close attendance, riding a
little in rear of Her Majesty. Now as Amye had no children, it appears
to me probable, that, instead of living alone in apartments in London,
she preferred living with friends in the country, and for that reason
staid at Mr. Hyde’s. She might have disliked, as many ladies did, the
64 Amye Robsart.
life of the Court. I have met with letters of that period, from
ladies of the highest rank, expressing their great weariness with its
state and formalities, begging their husbands to come back for
economy’s sake as soon as they could: at any rate not to drag them
up to London. But whilst Amye was so staying at Mr. Hyde’s,
she was only under his roof as a visitor and friend : she was perfectly
at liberty to go to London or wherever else she liked. She used
(as I will show you) that liberty, and she had suitable means pro-
vided for her so doing by her husband.
I have here two folio account books, kept, one by Mr. William
Chaucy, Lord Robert’s secretary or steward, beginning 20th Dec.
1558, the first year of Elizabeth’s reign: and a year-and-a-half only
before Amye’s death; the other by Mr. Richard Ellys, of about the
same time. Mr. Chaucy begins by a statement of monies received
into his hands, the first item of which is £300 from Mr. Anthony
Forster, Lord Robert’s Treasurer. Then follow, per contra, all the
payments made. I have gone through this account book, and have
extracted everything I could see that refers to Amye, Lady Dudley.
(See Appendix, III.) Examine the items and multiply their amounts
by six or seven (at the very least), to express present value—and you
be will able to say whether they convey to your mind any symptoms
of restraint or neglect.
The other account book (Richard Ellys’s) refers to 1560, the
last year of her life, but I have not met in it with any other items
than a few which refer to the expense of her funeral. There is
however a mercer’s bill (six months before her death) :—
£8. d.
1560. March. Delyvered a velvet hatt imbroidered for my ical 36 8
Pair of velvet shoes for my Ladye .. Ac «1a 00
In the account books the dates of month and day are not always
given, so that I cannot distinguish exactly which of them refer to
her whilst she was lodging with the Hyde family, at Denchworth,
and which to her later residence at Cumnor. But it is evident that
she was wader no restraint, for we find her journeying about, to
Lincolnshire, London, Suffolk, Christchurch in Hampshire and
Camberwell, twelve horses being at her command.
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A. 65
Cumnor.
It cannot have been much before the very last year of her life
that she removed from Mr. Hyde’s, at Denchworth, to Cumnor Place,
about eleven miles off. It is quite intelligible that she might have
found it more convenient to have a house in which she would be
more of the mistress than would be the case whilst staying at a
friend’s; and it seems unreasonable to suppose that if her husband
had any evil design upon her life, he would have placed her in
a house only a few miles from her most intimate friends. Cumnor
was a large building, quadrangular, and of ecclesiastical style, having
formerly belonged to the dissolved monastery of Abingdon. It was
not lonely, for it was close to a large village: and it had plenty of
inmates: Mrs. Owen (the proprietor), Mr. Forster and his wife, (the
tenants), Lady Dudley, Mrs. Odingsell a widow, sister of Mr. Hyde,
perhaps a companion to Lady Dudley. Mr. Forster purchased the
house after Amye’s death: and what is curious, by his will he left
the refusal of it to Dudley, on condition of his paying the widow
Forster £1200. Dudley actually bought it, for I found it entered
as his property in a schedule of his estates.’ It is hardly likely that
if he had caused his wife to be put to death there he would have had
much care to dwy the house. He would rather, one would have
thought, have preferred never to hear the name of itagain. Besides
the ladies I have mentioned as being in the house, there was a Mrs.
Pinto, (her own maid,) and a number of servants. Mr. Forster
resided there, but I have not met with any notice in these documents
of Sir Richard Verney, the brigand in the cloak, residing there at
all: and it seems not very likely that he would, having lands
and a residence of his own in Warwickshire. In all the arrange-
ments, so far as appears from these original papers, there is no sign
or token of preparation for any dark act of villainy.
_ And now having shown you several interesting original documents
relating to this history, I have to produce one which is not likely to
1 It was afterwards sold by Dudley to the Norris family (Earl of Abingdon),
In a schedule of Dudley property, at Longleat, is this entry :—
** A counterpart of the sale of Cumnor, &c., from Robert, Erle of Leicester, to Henrie Le Norris,
_ dated 15 Feb. Ao. 16 Eliz.” (Schedule, p. 120.)
VOL. XVII.—NO. XLIX. F
66 . Amye Robsart.
be less interesting than the others; being a letter from Amye her-
self. It was only by the greatest chance I did not overlook it ;
because among thousands of papers of every size and sort, it happened
to be pinned inside another paper, the other paper being a woman’s-
taylor’s bill, which the woman’s-taylor, Mr. Edney, had sent in, after
Amye’s decease, to Lord Robert. The letter therefore does not treat of
state matters, nor of politics, nor of religion, nor of any unhappy
condition she was in, but of a very simple and appropriate subject—
a new gown!
Amye, Lady Dudley’s letter to her Taylor.
‘“Cedney wt my harty comendations thesse shalbe
to desier you to take y* paynes for me As
to make this gowne of vellet* whiche I sende
you w* suche A collare as you made my
me
rosset taffyta gowne you sente =H last
& I will se you dyscharged for all I pray
you let it be done w* as muche speade
as you can & sente by this bearar
frewen the carryar of oxforde / & &
thus I bed you most hartely fare well
from comnare this xxiiij of avyguste
Your assured frind
Amyz DuppLey.”
‘To my very frinde will
yam / edney the tayler
at tower rill geve
this
in London.” +
Among other items of this poor lady’s wardrobe were “ a loose
gown of satten byassed with lace over the garde,” “a round kirtle of
russet wrought-velvet with a fringe; ” “
laced all thick athwart the guard;” “a Spanish gown of russet
damask ;” “a loose gown of rosset taffata” (the pattern alluded
to in the letter). Also lace, fringes of black silk and gold,
a Spanish gown of damask,
*: Vellet,”’? in the letter, is used by Spenser, for velvet. Chaucer, has velloute. Ben Jonson,
vellute, probably from the Latin villosus, hairy or woolly.
+Tower Royal, near Bucklersbury and the Mansion House, London. Stowe says the Queen’s
wardrobe was there, and that it had been a strong residence occupied by Royalty, afterwards turned
into stops. Others derive it from the merchants of La Reole, who established themselves there,
and that the street was called La Reole,
_——-
(frre
wll
ree ty
5
Fuc-simile han Original Letter trom AMYE [ROBSART), wite of LORD ROBERT DUDLEY.
found among the ae of Bath's Documents at Longleat, Nov: 50. 1865.
Ta TUTTE NTA PATADSUDLGITO PANG HOLOLSFANLORARULSO RLS HPA ETT SSS
rr aT 7 | il nih My, ii} MN wal}
WU 1 at
|
| cBrvey vo G ovty Main ae Se (Balbe,
to Scfhicr 0 foke a 0 Porpnc4t 2 BW fot
fo wieks ib fovene o Vv MOF Vy cy Fey
| Vee’ ve ve & collave at gk: Ka Coie”
( relfet caffe, gerne gem Sonbe aoe Ea
ie . wth fe you 2 ann Foe avaK ee yr
Yow tcf Go FIN sae Bue wveh & / ‘7
ate ot yew | ern Ns bas Dia ae
[vereee AGE Ay eR ee a
i er ths F Cor Yow ee a EE
d * 2)
from ceo wnnyr ©
ocr Vase wll por offrav e © vied
(pepe aeal ge oe |
i, ot fom er Crp fe Mu" ily 2 :
‘ 58 dhl il
‘y ) if [yes
f i) llth hit Wher, ences Tall
ae ea , POTTTTTT ROUT CROPeOT TEL OPENt (1 Ae RST FF FTF EEA Rp CSTE ECL rrr TTUVERWOH AY GEOTOO POA UOLYTVURL HETDEPD ce
CowELUs Awastatic Press re) - Edw: Kite, anasiae
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.8.A. 67
ruffs, collars, and the like. I mention these matters, merely to
observe that, as to dress, she appears to have been liberally supplied
with the finery of the day: no sign of parsimony in her apparel.
Also because all this must have been during her Cumnor life, one of
the last items having been, of necessity, incurred after her death, viz:
“4 mantle of cloth for the chief mourner.” (For the whole bill see
Appendix, No. IV.) }
Upon this letter, which, for some reason or other, appears to
have been kept by Edney the woman’s taylor, and delivered, together
with his bill, to the auditors of Lord Robert’s accounts, the single
remark I venture to make is: that the “ charges” for “ making-up,”
in A.D. 1560, even when multiplied six or seven times, contrast, as I
am assured hy competent judges, very favourably with those presented
by the woman’s-taylors of A.D. 1876. This is now the second letter
from her known to exist. .
It was whilst she was living at Cumnor during the last year of
her life, perfectly free from restraint, so far as appears from the
documents before us, that the Court, and indeed the whole country,
began to be filled with various rumours about Robert Dudley and
the Queen. All these rumours arose from the Queen being a young
unmarried lady, and from the anxiety which her counsellers, the
nation, and foreign nations too, felt, upon this question, vz: who, in
1Though it is quite impossible that Sir Walter Scott could have seen
this bill, his description of Amye’s dress approximates so nearly to the style of
dresses mentioned in it, as to show his accurate knowledge of the costumes of
the day. At the beginning of the novel, when the mercer Goldthread and
Tressilian, visit Cumnor, the mercer, who had seen her first, is asked by the
other: ‘‘ What was her appearance, Sir?” “Oh, Sir,” replied Master Gold-
thread, “I promise you, she was in gentlewoman’s attire—a very quaint and
pleasing dress, that might have served the Queen herself: for she had a fore-
part with body and sleeves, of ginger-coloured satin, which, in my judgement,
must have cost by the yard, some thirty shillings, lined with murrey taffata
and laid down and guarded with two broad laces of gold and silver. And her
hat, Sir, was truly the best-fashioned thing that I have seen in these parts,
being of tawny taffeta, embroidered with scorpions of Venice gold, and having
a border garnished with gold fringe :—I promise you, Sir, an absolute and all-
surpassing device. Touching her skirts, they were in the old pass-devant
fashion.”
F2
68 Amye Robsart.
case of her death, was to be the Successor to the Throne. It would carry
me too far into the general history of the times, to recite the schemes
and intrigues that were going on all around the Queen. There were
princes abroad, and noblemen at home, ready to be promoted.
Dudley was known to be in high favour; the Queen was believed
to be really attached to him. It was therefore easy enough for idle
gossip to grow into serious report: and consequently, when one man
said to his neighbour that she meant to marry Dudley, that neighbour
would say to the next, that, of course the wife would have to be got rid
of. Then it was said, that she was very ill: that she had a fatal com-
plaint, that she was to be divorced, that she was to be poisoned: that
Dudley had actually given instructions for her quiet disappearance.
We may imagine the effect of these horrible whisperings reaching
the poor lady’s ear. To any hopes that Dudley might be entertaining
they would only be most damaging : because though the Queen had
declared, rather pettishly, to her ministers, that “she was not going
to marry a subject, or allow any one beneath her to be called My
Lord’s Grace,” still, should she change her mind, public opinion would
hardly allow a Queen of England to select for a husband a man who
had caused his wife to be murdered. The last thing therefore that
Dudley would wish to hear among all these untoward rumours, would
be that his wife Aad met with a violent, i.e.,a sudden death. What
took place when that news actually reached him is described in some
letters, preserved (in transcript) in the Pepysian Library, at Cambridge.
These have already appeared in print, but as many of you may not have
met with them, and they bear rather closely upon my own narrative, I
will state their substance to you as concisely as I can.
Lord Robert was at Windsor, when (it is not known how—but news
travels in a marvellous way) he was informed that something was
wrong at Cumnor. He immediately sent off Sir Thomas Blount,
one of his confidential officers, to that place, about forty miles from
Windsor, to see what was the matter. This was on Monday, 9th
September, 1560. Whilst riding on his way towards Cumnor, Sir
Thomas Blount meets a messenger named Bowes, who was going to
Windsor with the intelligence that on the evening before, 7.e., of
Sunday, the 8th September, Lady Dudley had been found lying on
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A. 69
the floor of the hall at the foot of a staircase, dead, but without any
outward mark of violence. Bowes, the messenger, further told Sir
Thomas Blount that on the Sunday, being Abingdon Fair-day, Lady
Dudley had herself given the rather strange order that all her
household should go to the Fair. Mrs. Odingsell (Mr. Hyde’s sister,
the lady companion, or housekeeper) remonstrated with her, that
the day was not a proper day for decent folks to go to the Fair;
whereupon Lady Dudley grew very angry, and said: “she (Mrs.
Odingsell) might do as she pleased, but all er people should go:”
They accordingly went, leaving in the house, so far as appears, none
but the three women, Lady Dudley, Mrs. Owen and Mrs. Odingsell:
for there is no mention whatever in Blount’s account of the matter,
of any man being then in or about the house. When Sir Thomas
Blount had heard all this on the road, from Bowes the messenger,
Bowes passed on to Windsor: and Blount, instead of going straight
to Cumnor Place, stopped at Abingdon, four miles short of it; and
being curious to hear what was said, ‘puts up his horse, stays the
night (Monday night), calls in the landlord, pretends that he is
riding into Gloucestershire, and by way of talk asks “ What news
in these parts?”
Says the landlord, “There was fallen a great misfortune within
three or four miles of the town. My Lord Robert Dudley’s wife
was dead.” ;
Blount asked, “ How was that?”
The landlord replied “ By a misfortune as he heard : by a fall from
a pair of stairs.” !
Blount asked, “‘ By what chance ?”
The landlord did not know.
Blount asked, “ What was his judgment and the judgment of the
people? ”
He said, cautiously enough, “ Some said well, and some said evil.”
What do you think?” asked Blount.
The landlord said, “ He thought it must be a misfortune, because
1A pair of stairs, in the West of England, means a stair-case with two
landings.
70 Amye Robsart.
it happened in that honest gentleman’s house [meaning Mr.
Forster’s]. His great honesty doth much curb the evil thoughts of
the people: ” 2.¢., Mr. Forster was so well known as a respectable
man that no one would believe a crime could be committed in his
house.
“ Methinks,” said Blount, “ that some of her people that waited
on her should have something to say about this? ”
“No, Sir,” said the landlord, “ but little : for it is said they were
here at the Fair and none left with her.”
“ How might that be?” asked Blount.
“Tt is said,” answered the landlord, “ that she rose that day very
early, and commanded all her sorte to go to the Fair and would suffer
none to tarry at home: which was thought a very strange thing
for her to do.”
The next morning, (Tuesday, 10th) Blount, having heard what
was said and thought outside Cumnor, went on to the house itself,
and had the same account from the lady’s own maid, Mrs. Pinto.
He then asked her, “ What she thought of the matter; was it
chance or villainy?” The maid answered, “ By my faith, I judge
it chance, and neither done by man nor by herself: for she was a
good virtuous gentlewoman, and daily would pray upon her knees,
and divers times I have heard her pray to God to deliver her from
desperation.” “Then [said Blount] she might have an evil eye in
her mind?” (meaning, I presume, thought of suicide). “ No, good
Mr. Blount,” “said the maid, “do not so judge of my words. If
you should so gather, I am sorry I said so much.”
Blount then writes all these particulars to Dudley, adding, that
since he had been at Cumnor he had heard several things which led _
him to think that Lady Dudley had been somewhat disordered in —
mind: and that a coroner’s inquest was already sitting. After he
had sent the messenger off, comes another from Windsor, bringing
a letter, written by Lord Robert on his receiving the first news
brought to him by Bowes, whom Blount had met on the road,
It has been alleged against Dudley that he shewed great in-
difference by not going down immediately himself. But one may
look at his conduct in another light. He knew well enough that
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A. 71
he would be immediately suspected of having in some way led to the
violent death. If he had gone down in person, his presence might
probably have over-awed a country jury, and hindered them from
speaking out and asking questions freely. Or it might be said that
he had bribed them not to be too inquisitive. He therefore wisely
staid away: but he urged, in the very strongest terms, that no pains
should be spared to find out if it were done by villainy, and the
guilty parties to be declared. Also that all his wife’s own relations
should be sent for: thus giving to her family every opportunity of
fair play.
His letter (as given in Mr. Pettigrew’s pamphlet) was as follows :—
* Cosin Blount.
Immediately upon your departing from me there came to me Bowes,
by whom I do understande that my wife is dead, &, as he saithe, by a fall from
a pair of staires. Little other understandingecan I havefrom him. The great-
ness & the suddennesse of the mysfortune doth so perplex me, untill I do heare
from you how the matter standeth, or howe this evill doth light upon me, con-
sidering what the malicious world will bruyte [¢.e., will say] as I can take no
rest. And, because I have no waie to purge myselfe of the malicious talke that
I knowe the wicked worlde will use, but one, which is the verie plaine truth to
be knowen, Ido praye you, as you have loved me, and do tender me & my
quietness, and as nowe my special truste is in you, that you will use all devises
& meanes you can possible for the learning of the truth; wherein have no
respect to any living person: & as by your own travell & diligence, so likewise
by order of lawe, [I mean, by calling of the Coroner, & charging him to the
uttermost, from me, to have good regard to make choyse of no light or slight
persons, but the discreetest & substantial men for the juries: such as for their
knowledge may be able to search honorablie & duelie, by all manner of ex-
amynacions, the bottom of the matter: & for their uprightness will earnestlie &
sincearlie deale therein, without respect. And that the bodie be viewed &
searched accordinglie by them: and in every respect to proceede by order &
lawe. In the mean tyme, cosin Blount, let me be advertysed from you by this
berer, with all spede, howe the matter doth stande: for, as the cause & the
manner thereof doth marvelously trouble me, considering my case many waies,
so shall I not be at rest till I may be ascertayned thereof: prayinge you ever,
as my truste is in you, & as I have ever loved you, do not dissemble with me,
neither let anythinge be hid from me, but sende me your trewe conceyt and opinion
of the matter, whether it happened by evill chance or villainye: and faill not to
let me heare contynewallie from you. And thus fare you well. In moch hast,
from Windsore, this IX‘ day of September in the eveninge. Your lovinge frend
and kynsman, moch perplexed.
R.D.”
Lady Dudley had (as T mentioned above) a half-brother, John
72 Amye Robsart.
Appleyard, and an illegitimate brother, Arthur Robsart. So Dudley
adds, in a postscript :—
“T have sent for my brother [t.e. brother-in-law] Appleyarde, because he
is her brother, & other of her frendes also, to be theare, that they may be
previe & see how all things do proceede.”
Mr. Appleyard was a Norfolk man, High Sheriff of that county
the next year. Mr. Norris, and Sir Richard Blount, both of well-
known Berkshire families, were also there. The jurymen were all
strangers to Dudley: but such was the jealousy towards Court
favourites, that there were some among them who would have been
glad to connect him with the death if they could. Yet the answer
sent to him was that after the most searching enquiry they could
make, they could find no presumption of evil dealing. Sir Thomas
Blount himself asked in every direction, and declared he could not
find or hear of anything to make him suspect that violence had been
used by any person. Lord Robert then writes to desire that a second
jury of substantial honest men should be summoned: and to them
he sent this message: “To deal earnestly, carefully, and truly, and
to find as they shall see it fall out. And if it fall out a chance or
misfortune, so to find, and if it appear villainy (as God forbid so
mischievous or wicked body should live) then to find it so, and God
willing, I shall néver feare the due prosecution accordingly, what
person soever it may appear any way to touch: as well for the just
punishment of the act as for myne own trewe justification : for as
I would be sorry in my heart any such evil should be committed, so
shall it well appear to the world my innocency.”
Here, before proceeding, two or three remarks.
1. If he had really in any way encouraged, or connived at, a
violent death, it is next to impossible that he could have faced the
ordeal of inquiry in such a tone as this.
2. These letters, which passed between Dudley and Forster at the
very moment, annihilate some of the common falsehoods. For example
(1), Verney and Forster, (who by the way, are not even mentioned
in the letters as being near the place,) are said in the slanderous
narrative to have sent away all ¢he servants. It was Lady Dudley’s
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, FSA. 73
own doing, and a very strange thing indeed for her todo. (2), The
narratives say that the body was hastily buried, and that her father,
Sir John Robsart, ordered it to be exhumed for the coroner,
Amye’s body was not buried: for the inquest was already sitting
when Sir Thomas Blount arrived at Cumnor: and instead of
the matter being hastily smuggled through, it was most closely
inquired into, in the presence of all the lady’s own friends and
relatives that could be got together, under no restraint from the
presence of Dudley himself. Nor could her father Sir John Robsart
have given any order, for he had himself died several years before,
viz., in A.D. 1553.
3. Though (as I said in the earlier part of this paper) the evidence
found at Longleat does not clear up the whole mystery, still its
tendency is to give a new complexion to many of the circumstances,
It certainly does not present any traces of estrangement between
Dudley and his wife, nor of dark arrangements for putting her out
of the way.
Mr. Pettigrew (whom I mentioned as having written upon this
subject) accepts the verdict of the jury, that it was pure accident.
* But,” he adds, “there are at the same time some circumstances
that lead to a suspicion that it might have been her own act. The
strange stories which Sir Thomas Blount heard from the lady’s
maid: Amye’s prayers to be delivered from desperation and the
sending all servants out of the house for the day, for them to find
her dead when they returned.” These circumstances lead Mr.
Pettigrew to think that possibly she might for some time have been
labouring under mental infirmity, and that care and seclusion in the
house of friends with female companions about her, may have been
desirable, instead of her appearing about the Court, where her‘con-
duct might have excited remark and have been inconvenient. I
would add that the prevailing whisperings and slanders about the
Queen’s only waiting for her death, and that treachery was on foot
against her, may, indeed must, have reached her: and it is not
difficult to believe that continual suspicion of being marked, may
have had a depressing, perhaps a fatal effect. However, after a pro-
longed enquiry, the jury found it mere accident. For Dudley it was
74 Amye Robsart.
a very untoward accident: and that it shou/d just happen when every-
body was saying that something wow/d happen was undoubtedly one
of those very extraordinary coincidences which it is not easy to
explain to public satisfaction. She was buried by Dudley in St.
Mary’s Church, Oxford, with great expense and maguificence: a
number of ladies attending as mourners, followed by the University
dignitaries, and Dudley’s friends, some of them of the Privy
Council. The expenses of the funeral are mentioned in one of the
account books on the table. (Appendix, No. V.) The exact site
of the vault had been forgotten, but it has lately been ascertained
and an inscription ordered to be cut upon the top step of the three
steps rising into the chancel. I observed, in an Oxford newspaper,
mentioning this circumstance, that the Secretary of the Architectural
Society there, in sending to the paper some extracts from an old
MS. account of the funeral, says: “The more the death of Amye,
Lady Dudley, is investigated the clearer does it appear that the
traditional accounts are almost entirely wrong. It is a source of
great regret to all lovers of historical truth that the well-known
ballad of “ Cumnor Hall,’ and the more famous novel of “ Kenil-
worth,”
should serve to perpetuate historical fallacies long since
proved to be false.””’
In that opinion I certainly agree.!
Another favourable feature in this case is, that distinguished
men of the day who were familiar with Dudley harboured no sus-
picion of unkind feelings on his part towards the wife of his youth.
Among them particularly, Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, Ambassador
at Paris, of a party wholly opposed to Dudley in religion, being a
Roman Catholic. (Appendix, VI.) Also Sir Henry Sydney, father
of the famous Philip. Sir Henry told the Spanish Ambassador that
1 But I do not know whether the villagers of Cumnor will so easily give up
their tradition. They used, in my Oxford days, to adhere very closely to the
rumour of “foul play.” The magnificent funeral had dwindled down into
this legend, from the mouth of the old parish clerk, viz: That ‘‘ Madame
Dudley’s ghost did use to walk in Cumnor Park, and that it walked so obsti~
nately that it took no less than nine parsons from Oxford ‘ to lay her.’ That
they at last laid her in a pond, called ‘Madam Dudley’s Pond:’ and moreover,
wonderful to relate, the water in that pond was never known to freeze after-
wards.” See also Wilts Arch. Mag., i. 343,
By the Rev. Canon J. EB. Jackson, F.8.A. 75
the death “he was quite sure was accidental. He had examined
into the cireumstances with the greatest scruple, and could discover
nothing like foul play, however the public mind was possessed with
the opposite opinion.” This evidence comes from official Elizabethan
correspondence, discovered among the archives at Simancas, in Spain.
At Longleat, in Wilts, I found, by the merest accident, in a most
unlooked-for quarter, similar evidence, only more valuable, because
non-official. A common letter about sending venison pasties, and
apologizing for the possibly bad baking of them, is hardly a docu-
ment in which one would have expected to find anything to help in
forming an opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the husband of
Amye Robsart. But the fact is that upon finding that first curiosity,
her letter to her taylor, I scrutinized very carefully every scrap be-
longing to that period, in hopes of finding more. The following
letter to Robert Dudley is written by Henry Hastings, Earl of
Huntingdon, his brother-in-law. He was one of a few of Blood
Royal who were in turn named for the Succession to the Crown in case
of Elizabeth’s death: being a candidate of the House of York,
descended (through the Pole family) from George, Duke of Clarence,
‘brother of King Richard III., not, as it would appear, being himself
ambitious of the honour, but the nominee of a certain political party,
Lord Huntingdon’s letter was written from the town of Leicester,
17th September, 1560, nine days after the death of Amye, and
before the writer had heard of it. The postscript was added when
the news had reached him. .
Henry Hastings, Earl of Huntingdon to Lord Robert Dudley.
“*My very good Lord. After my most harty commendations, Although I
_ am sure you are not without plenty of Red deer, yet I am bold to send you half
a dozen pies of a stag which was bred in the little garden at Ashby (de la
Zouche). I would be glad to understand how the baking doth like you, for I
am in some doubt my Cook hath not done his part, but you must pardon this
fault, and it shall be amended: for if you love to eat of a stag, I will have one
ready for you any time (I trust) this winter. It shall be as fat as any forest
doth yield, & within 4 days warning he shall be sent to you. Thus my good
_ tord and brother I take my leave, wishing to you in all things as to myself.
From Leicester the 17 of Sept.
Your assured brother to the end
H. Huntyrnepon.”
“As I ended my Letter, I understood by Letters the death of my Lady your
76 Amye Robsart.
wyfe, I doute not but long before this tyme tou have considered what a happy
hour tt ts, which bringeth man from sorrow to joy, from mortality to immor-
tality, from care and trouble to rest and quietness: & that the Lord above
worketh all for the best to them that love him well. I will leave my babbling,
& bid the buzzard cease to teach the falcon to fly: § so end my rude post-
scrip.”
“To my very good Lord & Brother, the Lord Robert Dudley.”
On this letter I would only make one remark. It is a fair instance
of the value of private and familiar documents. Official papers are
always got up with a certain formality of preparation, to meet
the public eye, or for a purpose. Here is a simple private letter, of
the very time, naturally written, on an ordinary subject, not likely
to meet any other eye than that of the person written to, and there-
fore most unlikely to contain any fictitious or misleading sentiment.
Being merely a friendly message about such every-day matters as
pies and a cook, it suddenly turns off, on the receipt of serious news,
to a tone which would have simply been a piece of sickening
hypocrisy, if the writer had ever had the faintest inkling of ill-will
or ill-conduct on the part of Dudley towards his wife. If any such
feeling had existed it must have been well-known to his own brother-
in-law.
There would be, if we could but find it, conclusive evidence upon
this mysterious story, in the written depositions taken at the coroner’s
inquest, and the full statements of all who were examined. Some ~
years ago I wrote to the Coroner for the County of Berks, to know
if either in his Office, or in any other depository of County Records,
he could help me to recover those papers. It so happened that this
gentleman (Mr. Bartlett) had himself written a book upon the very
subject, a “ Guide to Cumnor,” and of course had used all efforts to
find the original papers, but he was afraid it was now hopeless.
There remains now only one more item of evidence in Dudley’s
favour, found (also quite accidentally) among the old letters at
Longleat. It is a very important one as bearing upon our story :
and it is also another curious instance of the value of secret history.
One of our living Historians has taken much trouble in dealing
with Dudley’s case. He has had the benefit of much correspondence
By the Rev. Canon J. B. Jackson, F.S8.A. 77
and other matters newly brought to light, both among our own
Records and those of Spain. He has carefully weighed and sifted
all this, and though Lord Robert is apparently not one of his favour-
ites, still, upon this particular question, Mr. Froude is, upon the
whole, inclined to acquit him. But there is one particular document
which has yet to be explained before the acquittal is quite satisfactory.
This is in the large collection of papers at Hatfield. It appears to
Mr. Froude (if not explained) to show that Dudley was not so
zealous as he seemed to be: that his unhappy wife was indeed mur-
dered, and that with proper exertion the guilty persons might have
been discovered. Longleat supplies an explanation.
I asked you, a little while ago, (p. 53,) to keep in mind the name of
a Mr. John Appleyard, half-brother to Amye Robsart, one of the
relatives whom Dudley insisted on bringing to Cumnor to watch the
proceedings at the coroner’s inquest. The Hatfield document refers
to this person.
In 1567, seven years after Amye’s death, the question of Dudley’s
marriage with the Queen again came forward into public discussion.
Of course it excited the vigilant jealousy of some, the religious or
political opposition of others. The old suspicions about Amye’s death
were not forgotten. The substance of the Hatfield document is, that
it had been reported to Cecil (in 1567) that John Appleyard had been
heard, some time before, in a moment of irritation, to let fall words
to this effect (for I will not detain you with the whole at length) :
that he, Appleyard, “ had not been satisfied with the verdict of the
jury at her death; but that, for the sake of Dudley, he had covered
the murder of his sister.’ Upon this being reported to Cecil, it
became imperative to have the matter enquired into : so Cecil orders
Appleyard’s attendance, and requires him to explain, very precisely,
What he had meant by those words? Appleyard explained away his
words in this manner : that though he would not exactly say Dudley
was himself guilty, yet he, Appleyard, had thought it would be no
difficult matter to find out who the guilty parties were.
That is the substance of the only remaining paper upon which
Mr. Froude appears to suspend his judgment. He says: “If
Appleyard spoke the truth, there is no more to be said. The con-
78 Amye Robsart.
clusion seems inevitable, that though Dudley was innocent of direct
influence, the unhappy lady was sacrificed to his ambition, and was
made away with by persons who hoped to profit by Dudley’s elevation
to the throne.” With that remark, Mr. Froude leaves the case.
“Tf Appleyard spoke truth, there is no more to be said.”
It will give our eminent Historian a certain satisfaction to hear
that John Appleyard told fibs: of which I can assure him, by having
found the proof thereof (again, as before, by the merest accident) ;
not in any public or official communication, but in an ordinary private
letter, telling the news of the day in the most zmartificial manner :
just like that of the Earl of Huntingdon’s read a few moments ago,
which began about venison pasties, and ended with condolence on
the news just come of the death of the wife.
The letter I now produce is one from Sir Henry Nevill to Sir
John Thynne, the builder of Longleat House. Sir Henry Nevill
was a Berkshire gentleman, a friend of Sir John Thynne, writing
to him from London, an ordinary letter, of family news and the
events of the day.
Sir Henry Nevill to Sir John Thynne. 1567, June 9.
“ After my herty comendacyons unte yowe & my Lady, & the lyke from awll
our wemen who I thanke God are awll in helthe. I hav so rare messengers
that I may trust that I dare not ventewr no letters of any importance. Now,
havyng Ludlo, I wyll send you seche as here are currant. On Fryday in the
Star-Chamber was Apylyeard brought forth, who showed himself u malytyous
beast, for he dyd confesse he accusyd my Lord of Lecyster only of malyes:
& that he hath byn about yt thes 3 years, & now, bycausse he cold not go
thoroghe with his bysens [business] to promot, he tell in this rage ageynst my
lord & wold hav acusid hym of 3 thnges: 1. of kyllyng his wif. 2. of sending
the lord Derby in to Scotland. 3. for letting the quen from maryedge. He
cravyd of pardon for awll thes thyngs . . . . My lord keeper answeryd
that . . . . in King Henry 7‘ dayes, there was one lost his ears for
slawndering the Cheff Justyce: so as I thinke his end wy] be the pillyry. [The
letter then continues with other miscellaneous matter. }
John Appleyard’s grievance against Dudley (as stated in the letter)
was that Dudley had not promoted Appleyard’s “ business ” in some
way, but for three years had neglected him: whereupon Appleyard
turned against Dudley and did all he could to revive the slander about —
the murder of the wife. What the particular “ business” was that
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.S.A. 79
Appleyard had expected Dudley to “ promote,”’ I do not undertake to
say for certain, but it was perhaps this. I find from another original
letter at Longleat that, so far back as 18th August, 1560 (the year of
Amye’s death), Sir Thomas Gresham had written to Lord Robert,
requesting him to use his influence in obtaining for John Appleyard
the Lordship of Wyndham, co. Norfolk, for his better maintenance in
the service of Her Majesty in those parts. Probably Dudley had not
done all he could to help his kinsman, and it is not unlikely that this
was the disappointment thathad exasperated Appleyard and had caused
him to let fall his evil speeches. However, be the provocation what
it might, John Appleyard did not speak the truth, but confessed in
the Star-Chamber that he had been a /iar. Whether this “ maly-
tyous beast” did or did not arrive at the pillory, and depart with the
loss of his ears, I do not know, but in the opinions of Sir Henry
Nevill and the Lord Chief Justice, he richly deserved it.
Such are the few particulars, hitherto wholly unknown, supplied
by the Longleat Papers, on the question of Dudley’s guilt or In-
nocence in the case of Amye Robsart. They did not come ready to
hand, tied up with official red tape, but were gleaned one by one, at
intervals, and after patient scrutiny of a very large mass of faded
and difficult handwriting. The documents and letters in which they
occur, being original, contemporary, and altogether inartificial, are
first-class evidence. It has not been in any way my object to draw
forced conclusions from them, but simply to extract their fair bearing
on this celebrated case. It may perhaps be thought that the cloud
which has hung so long over Lord Robert Dudley’s name in con-
nection with it is not so dark as it was before.
I think it only right to add, in conclusion, that having had,
through the friendly permission of the Marquis of Bath, the oppor-
tunity of discovering a considerable number of letters written to
Robert Dudley by persons of almost every rank of life, they have left
upon my mind a rather favourable impression. Those letters
make allusion to his kindness, his courtesy, his accomplishments.
Nothing can be more straightforward and generous than his
replies, his advice, his instructions. I cannot persuade myself
80°
Amye Robsart.
that such a man, if he had been suspected of having, and much
less if he really had, any direct or indirect hand in the death
of Amye Robsart, would have been, as he was, within four years of
her death, elected Steward of the Boroughs of Wallingford, Reading,
and Abingdon, and CHANCELLOR OF THE UNIVERSITY oF OXFORD,
all within a few miles of Cumnor Puacz.
i.
iil.
Vi.
Vill.
J. E. Jackson.
APPENDIX.
Original and Contemporary Documents.
. (4 Edw. VI., A.D. 1550, 24th May.) Covenant by John
Dudley, Earl of Warwick (afterwards Duke of Northumber-
land), to settle Cokkisford Priory, Co. Norfolk, and other
lands, on his son, “ Robert Duddeley, Esquyer,” upon his
intended marriage with Amye, daughter and pee of Sir
John Robsart, Kt.
(1553, 1557, and 1558.) Later deeds naming Robert Dudley
and Amye as husband and wife.
(1558, 1 Eliz.) Items relating to Amye, Lady Dudley, ex-
tracted from the account books of Lord Robert Dudley.
. William Edney the taylor’s bill to my Lord Robert’s wife.
. (1560.) Expenses of the funeral of Amye, Lady Dudley, ex-
tracted from the accounts of Richard Ellys, steward to
Lord Robert.
(1560, October 10th and 29th.) Letters from Sir Nicholas
Throckmorton after Lady Dudley’s death.
i. (1563, 20th June.) Warrant from Queen Elizabeth to deliver
possession of Kenilworth Castle to Lord Robert Dudley.
(1563.) A butcher’s bill to Robert Dudley, Earl of Fags oe
audited by Anthony Forster and others.
Appendix. 81
ix. (1566.) Orders to tradesmen, signed by Anthony Forster.
x. Letter to Anthony Forster, from Robert Dudley, Earl of
Leicester, about preparations at Kenilworth Castle for the
Lord Keeper Bacon’s visit.
No. I. (p. 53.)
(4th Edw. VI., A.D. 1550, 24th May.) Covenant by John Dudley,
Earl of Warwick (afterwards Duke of Northumberland) to settle
Cokkisford Priory, Co. Norfolk, and other lands, on his son,
* Robert Duddeley, Esquyer,” upon his intended marriage with
Amye, daughter and heir of Sir John Robsart, Kt. (Original at
Longleat.)
‘This Indenture made the xxiiijth day of May in the fowerth year of the
raign of our Soverayne Lorde Edwarde the sixth by the grace of Godof England
Fraunce and Ireland Kinge, Defender of the faythe and in earth of the Churche
of England and also of Ireland the supreme head Betwene the right honorable
John Earle of Warwyke, Viscounte Lysle, of the honorable order of the gartyr
knight and lorde grayte Mayster of the Kinge’s moost honorable householde on
thone partie and Syr John Robsert knyght of thother partie Wytnesseth that
the said parties bene fully condiscended and agreed that a maryage shortely upon
thensealinge hereof shalbe hadd and solempnyzed betwene Robarte Duddeley
_esquyer one of the yonger sonnes of the said Erle and Amye Robsart daughter
and heyre apparaunte to the said Syr John Robsart if the said Robarte and
Amye will thereunto condiscend and agree and in consideracion of the said
maryage eyther of the said parties dothe covenante and graunte to & with the
other in manner and forme folowinge, that ysto say. Fyrste Whereas our saide
soverayne Lorde the Kinge by his letters Patents bering date at Westminster
the xx day of Maii last past dyd amongest other things geve and graunte to
the said Erle and hys heyres the reversion and reversions of all that his Scyte
Cyreuyte and Precincte of the late Pryory of Cokkysforde and of all that the
manor of Cokkysforde in the countie of Norfolk with all theyre rights members
& appurtenances whatsoever they were to the said Pryory lately belongynge &
aperteyning & late being parcell of the possessions and revenues of Thomas late
‘Duke of Norfolk of high treason attaynted, and of all & every the howsings
_buyldings gardynes orchards lands and soyle within the said Scyte & precyncte
of the said late Pryory of Cokkisforde, and of the Rectories and Churches of
_ Est rudham West rudham Brounsthorpe and Barmer & the moytie of the Rectorie
of Burneham and also of the manors and farmes of Est rudham West rudham,
Barmer, Tytlesale, Syddisterne Thorp market & Bradefylde with all theyre
rights members & appurtenances whatsoever they be to the said late Pryory of
Cokkesforde lately belonginge & apperteyning, and of the advocacion & right of
patronage of the Vycarages of the said Churches of Est rudham West-rudham
Brounsthorpe & Barmer aforesaid & of the moytie of the adyocacion of the
VOL. XVII.—NO. XLIX. G
82 Amye Robsart.
Vycarage of the said Churche of Burneham and of all that warren of conyes
called Brokelinge, and of the courses of faldage of sheep called many ewes &
wether course and of one course of faldage of sheep called Warren slake with
theyre appurtenances in Est rudham aforesaid, & of one other course of faldage
of sheep with the appurtenances called the Gouge in West rudham aforesaid,
and of all other his Grace’s lands tenements & hereditaments whatsoever they
were in Est rudham West rudham Brounsthorpe Harpton, Folsham, Woodnorton,
Hillington, Burneham, Sydesterne, Estbarsham Broughton Barmer Tatersett
Tateresforde Oxwyke Tytlesale Gestwyke Lenne Regis Thorpemarkett & Brade-
fylde in the said countie of Norfolk or in any of them to the said late Pryory
of Cokkisforde by any manner of way belonging or apperteyning as by the same
letters Patents more at large may and doth appere Hyt ys now to be knowene
by these presents that the said Erle for the consyderacons afforesaid hathe gyven
granted bargayned and solde and by these presents dothe clerely geve grant
bargayne and sell unto the said Robarte and Amye and to the heyres of the body
of the said Robarte all that his reversion and reversions of all and singler the
said premisses and all his tytle & interest in to & for the same premisses & every
or any parte or parcell thereof, and that the said Erle and his heyres & every of
them at all tymes hereafter for and duringe the tyme of one hole yere next and
immedyatly ensuing the date of these presents shall do and suffre to be done
all and every thinge & thinges act & actes which shalbe resonablely devised for
the more better assurance of suer conveyaunce of the tytle and interest whiche
the said Erle hath in to & for the premysses or any parte or parcell thereof to
be had made & conveyed to the said Robarte & Amye & to the heyres of the
body of the said Robarte & for defalte of soche issue to the right heyres of the
said Erle for ever AND that the said Erle for the consideracons aforesaid shall
by good and lawfull conveyaunce & assurance in the law geve graunte & assure
unto the saide Robarte & Amye & to the longer lyver of them one annual or
yerely rent of Fyftie Pounds of good and lawfull money of England with a clause
of distres for non-payment thereof to be growinge owte of the manor of Burton
Lyslein the countie of Leycester &of all other his lands tenements and hereditaments
in Burton Lysle foresaid. To Have AND PARCEVE the said yerly rent of fyftie
poundes untothe said Robarte and Amye & to the longer lyver of them from the
day of the said maryage solempnysed, at the Feastes of St. Mychell th’ archangell
and the Annuncyacon of our Lady by even porcyons for & during the lyf of the
Righte excellent Prynces the Lady Marie’s grace sister to the Kinge’s Majestie
if the said Lady Mary fortune so longe to be unmaryed with this Proviso to be
conteyned in the said graunte that immedyatly from & after the Deathe of the _
said Lady Mary or that she fortune to be maryed that then & from thensforth
the said graunte of the said yerly rent to be voyde & of no force in the law
Anp over that the said Erle covenanteth & promyseth to & with the said Syr
John Robsart to pay unto the said Syr John Robsart at th enselinge of these
presents the sum of Too Hundred Powndes of good and lawfull money of England
wherof the said Syr John Robsart clerly acquyteth & dischargeth the said Erle
his heyres & executors by these presents AND the said Syr John Robsart
covenanteth and graunteth for hym his heyres & executors to & with the said
Erle his heyres & executors that he the said Syr John Robsart & the Lady
Elizabeth his wife shall at the proper costs & charges in the law of the said —
EE
Appendix. 83
Erle his heyres or executors do and suffre to be done all and every soche resonable
acte & actes thinge and thinges wherby the manors of Sydisterne, and Newton
juxta Byrcham in the countie of Norfolk, the manor of greate Byrcham in the
said countie of Norfolk, & the manor of Bulkham in the countie of Suffolk and
all & singular those lands tenements & hereditaments accepted reputed letten
knowen or taken as any parte parcell or membre of the said manors or of any
parte or parcell thereof or being letten to or with any of them with theyre
appurtenances being parcell of the inherytaunce of the said Syr John
Robsart shall & may be conveyed to the said Syr John Robsart during
his lif without impechement of any manner of waste, the rem’ thereof to the
said lady Elyzabeth duringe her lyf, the rem’ thereof to the said Robarte & Amye
and to the heyres of the body of the said Amye and for defalte of soche issue
the rem’ thereof to the ryght heyres of the said Syr John Robsarte for ever.
Anp over that the said Syr John Robsart covenanteth granteth & promyseth to
& with the said Erle his heyres and executors that he the said Syr John Robsart
shall well & truely during his lyf if hit fortune the said Robarte & Amye so
longe to lyve, content & pay to the said Robarte yerly during the said terme the
sum of Twenty Powndes of good and lawfull money of England to be paid at
fower times in the yere that _ys to say at the Feaste of St Mychell tharchangell,
the nativitie of our Lord th annuncyacon of our lady and the natyvytie of
saynt John Baptist by even porcions. AND also the said Syr John Robsart
covenaunteth promyseth & graunteth to & with the safd Erle that yf hit shall
fortune the said Robarte and Amye & the heyres of theyre too bodyes lawfully
betwene them begotten or any of them to outlyve the said Syr John Robsart
and the lady Elizabeth his wife that then the said Robarte & Amye & the heyres
_ of theyre too bodyes or one of them shall after the decesse of the said Syr John
Robsart & the lady Elizabeth have and enjoy of the fre gifte will and legacie of
the said Syr John Robsart the nombre of Thre Thowsand Shepe to be left in a
stokke goinge on the premisses in Norfolk & Suffolk foresaid. In WytNnzEs
wherof to thone parte of these presents remayning with the said Erle the said
Syr John Robsart hath put his seale, and to thother parte remayning with the
said Syr John Robsart the said Erle hathe put his seale the day and yere fyrste
above wrytten.
J. WARWYK.”
[A large seal: but arms.and legend utterly effaced.
In an official hand underneath: ‘‘ Capt’ et recognita coram me Ricardo Stan-
dish vicesimo quarto die mensis Maii et anno Regni Regis suprascripto.”’]
No. II. (p. 54.)
(A.D. 1553, 1557, and 1558.) Later deeds naming Robert Dudley
and Amye as husband and wife. (Original at Longleat.)
Hamessy, Co. Norfolk. 7 Edw. VI. (1553), 4th February. [ ndorsed.]
“ The counterpayne of a deade made by the Duke of Northumberland to my
Lord and my Lady of the Manor of Hemesbye.”
a2
84 Amye obsart.
(The original isin Latin. Translated, and in brief, it is thus: ]
‘To all the faithful in Christ, &c., John, Duke of Northumberland, Earl
Marshal of England, and Great Master of the Household of our Lord the King,
greeting. Whereas by Letters Patent, 21st November, 6 Edw. VI., the King
granted to him the manor of Hamesby lately belonging to the Cathedral Church
of Norwich and the Church and Patronage of the Vicarage of Hamesby, with
all rights, (‘nativos et nativas et villanos cum eorum sequelis’) &c. To have,
&c., to the said Duke and his heirs for ever: paying to the crown yearly £4 8s.7d,
for the manor, and 22s. for the Rectory, into the Court of Augmentations.
Know ye that I have given and granted the said manor, &c., to Robert Dudley,
Lord Dudley, my son and the Ladie Amie his wife. To have and to hold the
same to them and the heirs of the body of the said Robert lawfully begotten, to the
use of the said Robert Dudley, Amie his wife and heirs of his body, &e. Know
also that I have appointed my beloved in Christ, John Robsart, Knight, my
attorney to deliver the same to the said Robert Dudley and the Lady Amie his
wife.
NoRkTHUMBERLAND,.”
[Seal of eight quarterings within the garter. ]
SypisteeneE, Co, Norfolk. 30th January, 3 & 4 Philip and Mary (1557).
‘¢ Whereas John Robsart, Kt., lately deceased, was seised of Sydisterne,
Newton juxta Byrcham, and Great Byrcham, remainder to his wife Elizabeth,
remainder to Robert Dudley and Amie his wife, daughter and heir apparent of
said John, remainder to issue of Robert and Amia, rem’ to right heirs of John
Robsart: which manor of Sydisterne, &c., Elizabeth since the death of John
now holds, &¢.”
[From original Patent. ]
Hates Owen, Co. Salop, 1558, 24th March (4 and 5 Philip and Mary).
‘CA license of Alienation trom Philippe and Maryej’to Sir Robert Dudley
and Amye his wief, to alienate Hales Owen to Thomas Blount,”
Ditto. 27th March.
‘* A counterpane of the Sale of Hales-Owen passed from Sir Robert Dudley
and Amye his wief to Thomas Blounte and George Tooky.”
No. III. (p. 64.)
Items relating to Amye (Robsart) Lady Dudley, extracted from the
account books of Lord Robert Dudley. (Original at Longleat.)
Gyven to Gowre for hys charge riding into Lincolnshire to my ladie xxs.
Paid his hyer of certen haknes [hacknies] for my ladie lxi?
Item to John Forest for his charge Ryding to Mr. Hide’s to my ladye _ iii*.iiij4,
For Gower for my Lady, coming out of Lincoln xxvi", viiit.
To Johans for riding to Mr. Hide’s to my lady iii’. iiij4,
To Mr. Blunt’s horsehier when he rode to my dady in the Christmas 6s, 84,
To Johnes for my lady 66s, 84,
Appendix. 85
To hier of xii horses when my lady came from Mr. Hide’s to London 605,
Item to Langham for 2 days bordwages attending upon my lady at
Christchurch, y’ Lordship being at Windsor 3°, 44,
To Thomas Johnes and his fellowes for their dynners, weyting uppon
my lady from Christchurch to Camerwell 3°, 84,
Item ; for my bote-hier to London about the despatch of my lady 82,
Item; for a trunke saddell with y° appurtenances for carrying of
my ladie’s apparel 20s,
To Thos. Johnes to buy a hoode for my lady XXXV‘,
To Gilbert y° gouldsmith for 6 doz. gould buttons of y* Spanish
pattern, and for a littell cheyne delivered to Mr. Forrest for my
lady’s use £xxx
To Mr. Virloe for lynnen cloath for my lady 51°.
— Twoell of fine Holland for to make my lady ruffes 12°.
— 22 ells of Russet taffata to make my /ady a gowne at 13°. 44, an ell 358,
Item, paid to Eglamby for my Jady’s charge from Mr. Hide’s to
Camberwell £10
Item, delivered for my lady’s charge riding into Suffolk: with xl
pistoles [a Spanish coin] delivered to Hogans to put into her
Ladyship’s purse £26 138°, 44,
1559. For sewing silk sent to my lady by Mr. Forster 4s.
For apparel sent to my lady and for the charges of Higgenes, her ,
_man, lying in London 60°.
For bringing venison to Mr. Hide’s 5°.
Item: ii pair of hose sent to my lady by Sir Richard Verney’s servant Ss
Item. for spices bought by the cook when your Lordship rode to my lady’s 225.
1559. For a looking glass sent to my lady by Mr. Forster 4s,
To Smyth the mercer for 6 yards of velvet at 43°. a yard : and 4
yards to the Spanish taylor for your Lordship’s doublet: and 2
yards for garding my lady’s cloak 112s, 64,
The following items, under the head of “ Play money,” show that
Lord Robert was frequently visiting at Mr. Hyde’s :—
To Mr. Hide which he lent your Lordship at play at his own house 40°,
Delivered to your Lordship at Mr, Hide’s at sundry times; by my
hands 20°; by Hugans 11°. and by Mr. Aldersey 28°, Total 67°.
No. IV. (p. 67.)
William Edney the taylor’s bill to my Lord Robert’s wife. Her
letter to Edney was found pinned within it. (Original at Longleat.)
Willm Edney To my Lorde Robarte Dudles wyffe*
£ s. d.
Imprimis, for makynge a lose gowne of satten byassed
wythe lace all over the garde 20 0
® This bill, as appears at the foot of it, was not paid till-five years after her death,
86
Amye Robsart.
for iiij yards of cotton at viij’. the yarde
for iij yards of Fustyane at x‘. the yarde
for vj ownces of theine lace at 2°. 84. th’ ownece
for iiij yards of pointinge ribbin
for frese and buccarome to the roffes and coller
for iij ownces of silke to set on the lace ; at
xx‘, the ownce
for makyng a rownde kyrtell of rossett wrought
velvet wyth a fringe
for ij yards and a 3 of Kersay at 3°. 4%. the yard
for linnen clothe to the placarde
for 24 ownces of rosset fringe at 2°. 84. the oz.
for makynge a lowse gowne of Damaske, laced
all thicke overthwart the garde
for iiij yards of cotton at viii’. the yarde
for iij yards of Fustayne at x’. the yarde
for iiij yards of pointinge ribbin
for vi ownces of theine lace at 2°. 84, the ownce
for iij ownces of sylke to the same
for fryse and buccarome to the roffes
for makynge a rownde kyrtell of sattin
for ij yards of kersaye at 3°, 4%,
for linnen clothe
for ij ownees of theine lace
for sylke to the same
”
Reste of my olde bill
summa, vii. iiij.
and delivered frome me to Mr. Gryse agene made.
for makynge a clothe, and an aprone
for vi ownces of theine lace wythe purles on
eche side the edge at 3°. the ownce
for sylke to set it on
for pointinge ribbin to the same
for lace to the toppe of the aprone
for 3 quarters of an ell of sarsnet to face it
for makynge a petecote of skarlet, wythe a
brode garde of velvet, stitched with viij
stitches
for 2 of an oz. of crimson grayne silke
for fyne Lennen clothe to the Bodyce
sum: ix, vii.
Imprimis, for makynge a Spanyshe gowne of rosset damask
”?
”
for vi ownces of lace at 4°. 84, the ownce
for sylke to the same
All these parcels abowve recevyd of Mr. Grise to make,
£ 8. d.
2 8
2 6
16 0
10
10
5 0
2 0
8 4
8
6 0
20 0
248
2.6.
10
16 0
5 0
10
4 0
6 8
8
5 8
12
13 4
viii. 0
18 0
2 6
12
4
6 0
4 0
2 38
1 4
v.
16 0
28 0
4
——
—
(p*.)
Appendix.
£ &.
for vi yards of Fustyane to lyne the gowne tr
bag and staye 5
“ for 4 yards of rosset pointinge ribbin
“f for 12 ownces of rosset fringe at 2°. 84, the
ownce 82
“ for Frese and buccarome to the roffes
” for makynge a rownde kyrtell of blacke velvet,
cut all over, and fringed 2
= for an ell and 2 of doble sarsnet at 8°. the ell 14
“ for 2 oz. and 4 of fringe at xxij‘. th’ ownce 4
2 for the cuttinge of the same kyrtell 6
+ for iij yards and 3 of fustayne to lyne the kyrtell (4
os for makynge a lose gowne of rosset taffeta 8
dp for vi yards of Fustayne to lyne the same gowne 5
An for sylke to the same 3
» for viii yards of pointing ribbin 2
of for frese and buccarome to the roffes rt
~ for a + of sarsnet to drowe owte the sleves 2
BS for makynge a pere of whit satten sleves 2
“ for = of an oz. of silver lace 5
» for sylke to the same
All these parcels above receyved of Mr. Grice, to make,
and delivered frome me to Mr. Grise agene, made
d.
10
canoe oo
iy
DODRRMAOHRS
sum XVi. XV. Viii.
for makynge a petecote of skarlet, with bodyce
and stockes of crimsin velvet 10 O
os for ij ownces of grayne silke 6 8
“ for Linnen clothe to the Bodyce and stocke 2 0
3 for making a round kyrtle, the foreparte of
velvet with a fringe of blacke sylke and
golde 2 8
“ for iiij yards of Fustyane 3 4
at for making a lose gowne of rosset taffeta, the
vi of July with 3 gards and 6 theine
stripes the gard, cut and stript and truste
with sarsnet 18 0
for sylke to the same 5 0
3 for vi yardes of Fustyane 5 10
As for frece and buccorome to the roffes and coller 12
& for 5 yards of pointing ribbin 14
” for new translatynge the coller of your velvet
gowne w'" gold fringe * 2 6
», for makynge a mantle of clothe for the chife
morner 6 8
87
* This ‘new translatynge the collar of the velvet gown” after the pattern of the ‘‘ rosset taffata ”
gown, is probably the item to which Amye’s letter to her taylor refers,
88 Amye Robsart.
£8. d.
» for makynge the slope, hood and tippit 5 0
sum: XX. V. Vi.
Imprimis. for makynge a Spanyshe gowne of velvet, w'®
a fringe of blacke sylke and golde 8 0
» for vi yards of Fustayne to lyne the gowne 6 10
fe for 4 yards of pointinge ribbin to the vents 12
“r for fryse and bocarum to the roffes 8
x for 3 a yard of sarsnet to lyne the for-slyves
and coller 3 0
p for makynge a lose gowne of damaske guarded _
byasse 20 0
+ for iiij yards of cotton 2 8
43 for ij yards of Fustyane 21
4: for ij ownces of theine lace 16 0
of for silke to the same 3 4
i for iiij yardes of pointinge ribbin 10
‘ for fryse and bocerome to the roffes 8
sum total £0 - 65°. 14.
These ij last parsells , Rec’. to make, frome Mr. Elis
and delyvered to hym agayne mayd.
The hole some of all theyis bylls comes to £23 10°, 74.
£ s. d.
Rec‘. in part of payment of this hole byll,
by the hands of Mr. Elis 10 0 0
Rest deue of this byll, the sum of 13 10 7
[In the writing of John Dudley as follows: ]
In consideration of his long forbearing
of his money, there is nothing abated of Ex‘, per nos.
his Byll. Jo: D:
Which said some of thirteen poundes ten shillings
and sevenpence remayne due to the said Will™. Edney THo. Broun.
by the right honorable Th’ Erle of Lecester, for all
manner of mournings and other demands, from the
beginning of the world till this xxv‘ of Februarie, Wim. Kynyatt.
Anno Octavo Elizabeth Regine.
Wrttyam EDNEY.
No. V. (p. 74.)
(A.D. 1560.) Expenses of the funeral of Amye, Lady Dudley, ex-
tracted from the accounts of Richard Ellys, steward to Lord
Robert. (Original at Longleat.)
JoHN DUDDELEY,
&s. a,
To Anthony Forster the 16th Sept. [1560] £140 and paid unto him
the 26th day af October £170 summa 310 0 0
To Jasper the joyner uppon his billes 11 10 6
Paid unto Garter, Clarencues, and other of the herraudes [heralds]
for theyre paynes abought my ladie’s funerales at Oxforth 5616 8
Appendiz. 89
£8 4d,
Item unto Richard Whetell, stapler, 23 Oct. forthe Redeamyng of
a Dyamond of my Ladies 25 6 8
Unto Robert Cooke, herraud, by your Lordship’s commandment 10 0 0
Paid for a Parryes head [ Paris hood] with other furnyture, for the
chieff morner, at my Ladye’s Buryal 210 2
Item for apparrell [vtz. a shroud] for my lady and for the charges of
Hyggenes her man lying in London for the same [¢.e., burial] 3.0 6
Item, p*. for mayling corde for clothe that was sent unto Oxforthe 1 6
Item unto carryers that carryed the s‘. packs to Oxfurthe 20 0
Item, paid for th’ exchaunge of one hundreth pounds of whight
monney into goold w*. was sent to Oxfurthe for the charge of the
buryall 16 8
To Clarencieux and other the herraudes for theare paynes-taking at
my Ladies buryall; in reward to them 5 0 0
To Jennings, Mr. Whittle’s servaunt for his bote-hier and paynes in
coming to Kewe to take measure of your lordship [7.e. for mourning] 0
For Ellis [the steward] a pair of black hose to morne in
For Mr. Browshill the same 1
No. VI. (p. 74).
Letters from Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, Ambassador at Paris, upon
hearing of Lady Dudley’s death. ~
(State Papers.)
A.D. 1560, October 10th. Throckmorton to Lord Robert Dudley.
‘*My very good Lord. By letters from my friend at your lordship’s com-
mandment Mr. Killigrew, of the 20th of the last, which I received the 7th of
this present, I understand of the cruel mischance late happened to my lady your
late bedfellow, to your discomfort. But for that God hath thus disposed of
things, the greatest of your grief by this time being assuaged and the remem-
brance thereof presently worn out, I will no further condole with your L: thereby
to renew your grief, but only say that as we be all mortal, subject to many
hazards (experience daily sheweth) and have no sure abiding in this unequal
world, so is she gone before whither we must all follow toa place of more assurance
and more quiet than can be found in this vale,” &e., &c.
[State Papers, Eliz. For. 19., f. 171]
1560, October 29th, Throckmorton to Chamberlain.
‘* My friends advertise me from home that my Lord Robert’s wife is dead and
hath by mischance broken her own neck, and here it is openly bruited by the
French that her neck was broken, with such other appendances I am withal
brought to be weary of my life. I pray God, hold his holy hand over us, and
80 evil be the reports as I am ashamed to write them. But as you are a wise
man and can consider how much it importeth the Queen’s Matie’s honour and.
her realm to have the same ceased, soI trust you will by your letters thence as
I do from hence help to do some good for the appeasing of the same. For though
bo bo 0
oof
90 Amye Robsart.
there be wise men at home who know what is meet to be done in such cases, yet
the advertisement thereof from ministers abroad hath a great deal more force.
Which I write unto you because then we be both in one ship and then the tem-
pest must touch us both alike.”
[State Papers, Eliz. For 19, f. 411.]
No. VII. (p. 54.)
(1563, 20th June.) Warrant from Queen Elizabeth to deliver pos-
session of Kenilworth to Lord Robert Dudley. (Zranslated from
the original Latin document at Longleat.)
‘¢ Elizabeth, Dei Gratia, &c., &c. Omnibus, &c. Appoints our beloved sub-
jects Thos. Blunt, John Sommerfield, John Blunt, John Braddyll, Wm. Hudson
and Alexander Rigby, our Attornies, together or separately to enter in our name
into our Domain and Manor of Kenelworth, and into our Castle of Kenelworth,
and Farm of our Manor of Astelgrove in our Co. of Warwick, parcel of the
possession of our ancient Duchy of Lancaster in our said Co., and into all build-
ings, &c., within the circuit of oar Castle of Kenelworth ; also the mill outside
the Castle, and all lands, &c., &c., &o, Also into Lathgram in our Co. of
Lancaster, and-Windhill in Bowland, and tenements in Ashley, in our said Co.
of Lancaster lately belonging to a Chantry founded in the Chapel of Clithero,
in the parish of Whalley, Co. Lancaster. And to deliver possession of all afore-
mentioned to John Duddeley, Wm. Glasher, or Roger Shurburne, attornies
appointed by our well-beloved eounsellor, Robert Duddeley, Kt., of the Most
Noble Order of the Garter, otherwise called Lord Robert Duddeley, Master of
our Horse, to receive possession of the same in his name and to the use of him
and his heirs and assigns for ever. To have and to hold the same by virtue of
Letters Patent under our Great Seal of England, and under our Seal of our
Duchy of Lancaster, dated 9th June, 5th year of our Reign.
Witness ourselves at Westminster, 20th June, 5th Eliz.”
[Endorsement on the Warrant.]
“ Possession and seisin of the Domain, Castle, and Messuages within-described
was given and delivered by Wm. Hudson, one of the within-written attorneys
to John Duddeley, to the use of the within-written Robert Dudley, Kt, of the
most noble Order of the Garter, otherwise called Lord Robert Dudley, Master
of the Queen’s Horse, by virtue of a letter of attorney given by the said Lord
Robert D. to the said John Duddeley and others, on the 29th day of June, 5
Eliz (1563): in view and presence * of
Thomas Duddeley
Robert Cooke als Chester ¢ By me George Raufe
Herald of Arms Richard Fowler
Be me Wm.Braband
Humfre Gower Robert Shere John Bland
* In the original, the names are all separately written or marks made, by the subscribers them-
selves, not in regular columns, but scattered all over the parchment, where each could findroom for
his name, :
Thomas Gower
John Butler
Wyllyam Corpson
Wyllyam Quyne
Thomas Jenkns
John Banbury
Lawrence Heath
Richard Wyllkyns
Lawrence Phyppet
Willyam Tasworth
Richard Harrison
Martyn Le
Thomas Tayllor
Jhon Rodd
Richard Lapwith
Willus Rogers
Appendix.
Thomas Whithed
Roger Preffeld
John Charmier
William Sothing [?]
Nicholas Hart
Willam Man
Thomas Flowson
Wylliam Tysell
Thomas Payne
Thomas Brydge [?]
Thomas Partridge
DBG
- Robert Cope
Tomas Massye
William Browne
George Myers
91
Richard Sewell
Wm. Power
Robert Grafton
Henry Tyner «
Henry Davies
Henry Mawdick
John Yardley
William Parson
John Harper
Robert Hudson
Thomas Hoper
ThomasPorsse[?]
John Overton
Thomas Skayls
Frevyle Phyppet
Thomas Mawde
Seisin & delivery of the Lands in the
Co. of Lancaster, was made in the view
& presence of
John Braddyll
Willyam Bollen
Miles Parker
Thomas Colthurst
Robert Swynythurst John Dymmoke
John Hawe Robert Craven
No. VIIL (p. 59.)
A butcher’s bill to Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester, audited by
Anthony Forster and others.
(Original at Longleat.)
John Ambrye } Upon the accompt of John Ambrye of Westm'.
j Bocher taken the xiiij* off Februarie Anno
Octavo Elizabeth Regine Before us, yt appereth
that my lorde of Lecester is indebted to the said
John Ambrye for suche stuffe as he the said i
Ambrye hath delivered to his L. officersin Anno / *¥*
Tercio quarto and Quinto Elizabeth Regine pre-
dict’, all things received and allowed to him from
the begynnyng of the world till this said xiiij‘»
of Februarie in the some of Fyftene poundes
Bocher
by me John
Ambri
Txo: BLowntTt
ANTHO: FoRSTER
Ex", per nos GrorcE CHRYSTMAS
JoHN DuUpDDELEY
Wittm, Kynyatt
92 Amye Robsart.
No. IX. (p. 59.)'
Orders to tradesmen, signed by Anthony Forster. A.D. 1566.
(Original at Longleat.)
‘Mr, Peegck I pray you delyver to thys berer foure elles of blak taffata for
a shorte gowne and thre yards of blak vellet to gard the same whyche gowne
my lord dothe gyve to Mr. Smythe the quenes man. and also iij yards quarter
of crymsen satten for a dublet whyche my lord gyvythe to the Mayre of Abyngton
and vij yards di’ of blak satten for ij dubletts whyche my lord gyvythe to ij of
the mayres brethern of the towne of Abyngton. thys hartely fare you well.
thys xvi of May 1566,
y AntTHo: ForstER.”
‘¢ Mres, Mountagewe I pray you deliver to this berer my Lords hosyer so moch
crymsyne fringe and lace as will tryme a paire of crymsyne hose,for Mr. Phillipe
Sidney and so moch purple as will tryme a paire of carnacon stammell hose *
and also so moch blewe and grene lace as will tryme ij payre of Lether hose.
Thus fare ye well. Wryten the second of August 1566.
yo’. frinde
AnTHO: ForstTER.”
‘“M's, Mowntagew wher as you have delyvered to‘Mr. Bull on[e] gross of
poynts and viij armyng poynts thys is yo" warrant for the delyvery of the same
whyche were delyvered thys progres at the guenes beyng at Kyllyngworthe. fare
you well thys xxiij of december 1566.
yo". very friend
ANnTHO: ForsTER.”
No. X. (p. 59.)
Letter to Anthony Forster, from Robert Dudley, Earl of Leicester,
about preparations at Kenilworth for the Lord Keeper Bacon’s
visit. .
‘¢ Foster
I wylled Ellys to speak with you and Mr. Spinola againe for that I
perceaved that he hath word from Flaunders that I can not have such hangings
thence as I loked for, for my dynyng chamber at Killingworth yet he thought
ther wold very good be had at this present in London and as good cheap as in
Flaunders. Palmer’s wyfe told me at Hatfeld that she was offred very good for
xj’. or xij. a nell. In any wise deale with Mr. Spinola hereabout for [he] ys
abel to gett such stuff better cheap than any man. and I am suer he wyll doe
his best for me. And though I cannot have them so depe as I wolde yet yf they
be large of wydenes and xij or xiij foote hygh hit shall suffyce. I pray you lett
* © Stamell,.a coarse kind of red, inferior to scarlet.’”—Nares’s Glossary.
Letters Patent of Edward IV. 93
me hear further what can be done herein. You might send to Killingworth for
them Juylle on Sonday night or Monday at furthest. I hope you have made the
provision of spice for me and have had the offycers of the howsehold to help,
who promysed me all at the Q. Matis pryce. And by cause my L. Keeper wylbe
with me this next weke I pray you send down with speed some such spyce as ys
nedeful for all other matters agaynst my chefest day.
I have no mystrust of your care of such things as ys to be sent thether. I
have geven this berer xii! to buy Tryfles withall for fyer works and such like.
When he hath provyded his stuff, cause yt to be safely sent hereafter for that I
have appointed him after iiij or v days to go to Killingworth for a bankating
howse that must be made. I have no leysure as you may see by my hast. Yf
I forgett that you may judge meet to be thought on for thys present, I referr yt to
your further order. So fare you well Anthony, in much hast, this xvj of July.
y'. loving m*.
R, LeycEstEs.”
To my loving Servant
Anthony Foster with
speed.”
Aetters Patent of Edtvard the LSourth,
CREATING THE CHANCELLORSHIP OF THE ORDER OF THE GARTER, AND
APPOINTING RICHARD BEAUCHAMP, BISHOP OF SALISBURY, AS FIRST
CHANCELLOR.
A.D. 1476.
[Communicated by James Hussry, Esq., and extracted from a
confirmation by King Edward VI., in the first year of his reign, of
the several charters of liberties granted to the Bishop, preserved in
the Muniment Room of the Mayor, Aldermen, and Burgesses of
the City of New Sarum, by permission of the Mayor and the Town
Clerk.]
“‘Tnspeximus Literas patentes Domini Edwardi nuper Regis Angliz quarti
factas in hee verba.
Edward par la grace de Dieu Roy d’angletere et de ffraunce, et Seigneur
Hirland a toutz ceulx qui ces patentes verront ou orront salut. Come entre
le offices de nostre ordre de la gartiere Il ny ait nul office de Chauncelleir par les
94 Letters Patent of Edward IV.
primer estatutes dicelluy ordre lequel office est bien licite et necessaire audit
ordre Volons et ordonnons que pour lexaltation et bien dudit ordre en Icelluy
aura ung officer nome Chauncelleir. Et pour tant que le office est grande et de
grande charge et requiert avoir ung notable personne yolons que nul ne soit en
Icelluy office sil nest in dignitee ecclesiastique come evesque, considerans en
oultre que la chappelle de Sainte George in nostre Castel royal de Wyndesore
ou ledit ordre est founde et assise et establie dedens le diocese de Salisbury-
Et nous aians regart aux vertux prudence et dilligence de reverent pere in Dieu
nostre cher et bien ame cousyn Richart Beauchamp a present evesque dadit
diocese de Salisbury qui pour lamour dudit ordre s’emploie de jour in jour vaquer
et attendre a lavancement et bone perfeccion de la belle oeuvre par nous com-
mence audit Shastel de Windesore sur la largeur de ladit chappele avons Icelluy
reverent Pere en Dieu ordonne et establie ordonnons et establissons pour le
terme de ea vie Chauncellier de ladit nostre ordre de la gartiere Et apres sa vie
volons et ordonnons que sez successours evesques de Salusbury a tous jours aient
et occupent ledit office de Chauncellier tout ainsi que cest nostre concession par
ladvis dez Confreres Chevaliers dudit ordre soit mis en execution sans prejudice
de levesque de Winchester en ce que touchant le ordre par lez primers estatuts
luiin doibt appartenir. Et aussi volons et ordonnons que le dessus dit Chauncellier
et sez successeurs evesques dudit Salusbury auront en garde le grant seall de la
dessusdite nostre ordre de la gartier du quel seall Ils ne pourront seelere nulles
lettres se non par la forme et la maniere come il est cedonne par les estatutz
dudit ordre ou par commandement especial de nous et de nos successeurs
souverains dudit ordre. In testiogne de quel chose cestes nostres lettres
avennons fair patentes Testoigne nousmesmes a Westminster ce x jour octobre
lan de nostre raigne quinziome.”’
@ccurvence of some of the Raver Species of
Hirds in the Aeighbourhood of Salisbury.
By the Rey. ArtHur P. Morres, Vicar of Britford.
(Read before the Society at Salisbury, August, 1876.)
PART I.—RAPTORES.
N yielding to the kind persuasions of my friends, the Rev.
A. C. Smith, and Mr. E. T. Stevens, to contribute a paper
on the natural history of this district, I will premise that I have
undertaken it as a duty as well as a pleasure, as no other person
came forward to fill the gap; and can only hope, that feeling per-
sonally a great interest in the birds of the air, and the beasts of the
field, I may find some kindred spirits amongst the members of the
Society, who will excuse the deficiencies of the paper, on account of
the interest which attaches, in their minds, to the subject.
I would remark, in the outset, that I believe this immediate
district is unusually rich in its occurrences of some of our rarer
birds ; and that it would well reward anyone, who had the time and
opportunity, to devote more attention to the subject than I am able
to do.
For in this neighbourhcod there are three especial attractions to
our feathered friends, which in many localities are wanting.—First,
the large and extensive water-meadows, which fringe the Avon all
the way down to Christchurch (the latter as good a neighbourhood
for birds, as is to be found in the South of England, and which is
not more than half-an-hour’s flight from us). Secondly, the bold
and sweeping downs, of which Wiltshire can so peculiarly boast, as
forming one of the distinguishing characteristics of the county.
96 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
And, thirdly, the close proximity of the New Forest, a perfect
paradise for the ornithologist and insect-hunter.
To begin at once with the subject-matter of this paper. I propose
to confine my remarks at present to the Raptores, or “ Birds ot
Prey,” which occur in the neighbourhood—though I must begin
with an exception, and ask pardon if for once I desert my local ex-
periences, and run off as far as the shores of Great Britain will allow
me, even to the top of Sutherlandshire, which does zo¢ abut on
Wilts. But I cannot refrain, inasmuch as I have gathered some
reliable information concerning the king of birds, Aguila Chrysaetos
“the Golden Eagle,’ which must, I think, be satisfactory to all
lovers of ornithology. This noble bird, I am glad to say, still re-
tains his throne securely in the North of Scotland, and in the county
of Sutherland is not yet uncommon. An intimate friend of mine,
who spent some time in that county last year, himself saw one ; and
was told that there were four well-known eyries still existing in one
part of the county; and that the Duke had given strict orders to
his keepers that the eagles were no longer to be molested in any
way, so that now they are being strictly preserved there. My friend,
in the course of his wanderings, saw one of the keepers, who had a
fine young Golden Eagle, alive, which he had captured shortly before
this order of the Duke was given—and he told him that not very
long before he had trapped no less than ten eagles within a week.
My friend also fell in with another keeper, who had since turned
publican, who said that some few years previous to this, he had des-
troyed nineteen or twenty eagles within a month. Now even if we
allow something for exaggeration, and that possibly some of these
birds may have been the young of the “ White-tailed Hagle,”
(Halizetus albicilla) it leaves a large and trustworthy margin for the
inference that Aguila Chrysaetos still holds its own in our British
Isles. And when we think of the wholesale slaughter that up to
the present time has been committed in its ranks (as, for example,
I read in the “ Naturalists’ Library ” that between March, 1831,
and March, 1834, no less than one hundred and fifty-one adult birds,
with fifty-three young and eggs, were destroyed in the county of |
‘Sutherland alone), I am sure my brother ornithologists will rejoice
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 97
with me in knowing that the king of birds still exists amongst us,
and ery, “The king is dead! Long live the king.”
Haliaetus Albicilla, “ White-tailed, or Sea Eagle.” On coming
to speak of this species I can approach much nearer home. These
birds are still occasionally to be met with in the neighbourhood of
Christchurch. Mr. Edward Hart (the son of the late William Hart,
the well-known naturalist of West End, Christchurch) informs me
that he has had ten or twelve specimens pass through his hands for
preservation within the last fifteen years, and that Lord Malmesbury,
who has several local specimens of these birds in his collection,
PEWS. -
.
exchanged with him not long ago a fine Sea Eagle for a well-
plumaged Heron—which speaks for itself that Halizetus Albicilla
was not considered by his Lordship as being such a great rarity in
these parts. It is now four years ago since Sea Eagles visited
Christchurch. But in 1872 a pair located themselves in the neigh-
bourhood, and were observed there for some time. One of them was
at last shot by a keeper, but was unfortunately not found until it
was quite unfit for preservation, the bird having flown a long way
before it dropped. The last “ Sea Eagle” that was captured alive
at Christchurch was taken in the year 1866. This bird was caught
: by the foot in a rabbit trap, and sent to the Zoological Gardens in
Regent’s Park. About the year 1850, when I was living at
Wokingham, in Berkshire, I remember a relation! of mine, on his
returning from a drive to Reading, informing me that an enormous
_ bird, apparently of this species, had flown directly over his head,
and settled on an elm tree not far from the road-side ; appearing,
‘when perched, to be at least three feet in height. This bird was
seen the day after in the neiehbouring village of Barkham, flying
¥ off with a rabbit in its claws, and was not afterwards heard of in
_ that district. I myself obtained a fine specimen in the flesh that
‘was captured on the battle-field of Metz, in 1871. It had been
noticed haunting the neighbourhood for more than a month, feeding
on the carnage of the battle-field. It was at last trapped in nets,
1 Captain Elliot Morres, R.N., of Matthews Green, Wokingham.
VOL. XVII.—NO. XLIX, H
98 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
and sent alive to England, where however it soon pined in confine-
ment and died. This bird measured three feet from beak to tail,
and its expanse of wing was seven feet four inches. This specimen
is an unusually interesting one—affording, as it does, a practical
illustration of the literal truth of our Blessed Lord’s words, as
rendered in our English version: “ Wheresoever the carcase is, there
will the eagles be gathered together.” !
Pandion Halieetus, “The Osprey.’ This bird still visits the
neighbourhood of Christchurch, and is commonly known to the in-
habitants by the name of the “ Mullet Hawk.” It occurs there
annually with great regularity, appearing generally in the month
of October; and sometimes, though less frequently, in the spring.
So regular is it in its autumn appearance in the estuary, that as
often as the local fair comes round, which is held on October 17th,
the remark may be heard in the district, “‘ Now we must look out
for the Ospreys.” “ We get it yearly,” writes Mr. Hart, in the obliging
notes he has supplied me with. Three were killed there last year
(1875), two of which went to Lord Malmesbury’s collection, and the
third Mr. Hart has in hisown museum. Another bird appeared there
this spring, which chose the mouth of the river Stour for its usual
haunts, and after visiting the bay for some weeks, finally escaped in
safety. This seems seldom to be the case, as the extreme regularity
which they observe, both in their hours of feeding, and the line of
flight which they pursue to and from their favourite fishing grounds,
makes their capture comparatively easy. Since the year 1870 Mr,
Hart has had eight specimens pass through his hands for preservation,
some of which he has himself shot, viz., in 1870, two specimens ; in
1871, one ditto; in 1872, one ditto; in 1874, one ditto; and in
1875, three ditto. Mr. Rawlence, of Wilton, has a fine bird in his
collection which was captured at Shear-water, near Warminster, in
this county. It was taken by means of a spring set under the
water, and baited with a large trout, which it still holds in its claws.
Another good specimen was killed at the pond at Sandhill Park,
1It is well-known that the Sea Eagle is at times not impartial to carrion.
The Golden Eagle rarely condescends to touch it, unless driven to it by scarcity
of food; when the latter species also will make. a hearty meal off it.
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 99
Bishops Lydeard, about the year 1860, when I was in the neigh-
bourhood, and it is still not an uncommon thing to hear of its
‘capture in various parts of the country.‘
Faleo Gyrfaico, “The Jer Falcon.” Of the three recognised
varieties of the Jer Falcon (i.e. i., Falco Candicans ; ii., Islandus ;
and iii , gyzfalco—in other words, the “‘ Greenland,” “ Iceland,” and
“ Norwegian” or “Scandinavian” Falcons), I cannot say much
as far as local occurrences are concerned. Of the third species, the
true Faleo gyrfalco of Norway, I believe there is no authentically
recorded appearance in the British Isles ; * though of the other two
species there have been numerous instances. I had a beautiful
specimen of the “Iceland Falcon ” brought to my house this sum-
mer by Mr. Cecil Smith, author of the “ Birds of Somersetshire.”
This bird had been killed on April 12th of the present year, on the
island of Herm, near Guernsey, one of the Channel Islands. It was
seen there in company with another of its own species, which escaped
capture. It was a male in adult plumage, which is intermediate in
darkness of colouring between the “Greenland” and the “ Nor-
wegian” varieties. I have a good specimen of the “Greenland ”
Falcon in my own collection, but not a local‘one ; and Mr. Rawlence,
of Wilton, has also a fine Greenlander in his excellent collection of
Faleonide, which he bought as having been obtained in the North
of England, but he is unable to give me any further information
about it.
Faleo Lanarius, “The Lanner Falcon.” I almost fear I shall be
_ accused of presumption, if not of ignorance, when I assert that the
‘rare Lanner Falcon has been captured in this district. This bird,
‘Im size, comes between the “Jer,” and the “ Peregrine” Falcons,
and used to be flown especially at the Kite, with which the Peregrine
is scarcely big enough to cope. Now of this species, Yarrell, in one
of the former editions of his work, writes thus: “ Falco Lanarius,
1 While I am revising this paper—October 19th, 1876—a fine Osprey may be
seen almost every morning at the mouth of the river Avon, pursuing his daily
avocation.
_ * Foran accurate description of the differences between these Falcons I would
refer the reader to Professor Newton’s re-edition of Yarrell, now coming out.
H 2
100 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
a true Faleon, but much rarer than the Peregrine, and which
probably has never been killed in this country. Mr. Gould says,
he was unable to find a specimen in any collection here, either public
or private, at the time he was desirous of figuring this species
in his birds of Europe. The true Lanner is found only in the south
and south-east parts of Europe.” Now, in the face of such evidence
as this, I feel I am very bold in claiming this species as a “ district
visitor.” But I do so on these grounds—Mr. Hart writes me word,
“The Earl of Malmesbury has a pair of Lanners shot here, which I
believe are exceedingly rare.’ He is certainly right in his last
assertion, which would tend to prove that he is also right in his
first. Mr. Hart very obligingly called on Lord Malmesbury for me,
to get the exact dates of their capture; but his Lordship being away
from home, he could not obtain the desired information. But he
knows that they were shot on the Heron Court estate, by the keepers,
and that his father preserved them. Now I would only make this
remark—-as is well known, the young female of the Peregrine has
often been confounded with the “ Lanner” of Europe, and my friends
may say, these specimens can also be neither more nor less. But I
would suggest that Mr. Hart’s testimony is as good as can be
obtained ; for he who has had (I dare say) some fifty specimens of
the Peregrine pass through his hands in the course of his long
business, and that in all the different states of plumage, is the very
best man to decide the question. I regret I have not had an
opportunity of inspecting the birds myself: but, until convinced to
the contrary, I must claim the rare Falco Lanarius to have been
taken in this district.
Falco Peregrinus, “The Peregrine.” On the occurrence of this
Falcon, the representative, as it were, and most widely diffused of
all its species, I could find plenty to say. It is by no means to be
uncommonly met with in this neighbourhood : indeed I myself have
noticed no less than four at the same time, soaring round our
Cathedral spire—one of which settled on the extreme point of the
cross above the weathercock ; and on another occasion, when I was
at the “eight doors” on the top of the Cathedral tower, a fine Falcon
pitched on the fret-work, some thirty or forty feet above my head,
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 101
and took no notice whatever either of my presence, or my voice.
The Cathedral tower used at one time to be a favourite place with
them for devouring their prey, and I have picked up there the re-
mains of several birds eaten by them: amongst other relics I
one day discovered a snipe’s leg, and in the adjoining water-meadow
I have found the reinains of Wild Duck, Partridge, Woodpigeor,
and Moor-hen, recently killed by them. The workmen also, while
engaged on the restoration of the spire informed me that they had
often seen these birds bring up Pigeons and Partridges to devour in
the same place. A few years ago a friend of mine was shooting on
the Plain near here, when he was driven by a heavy shower of rain
to take shelter under a barley-rick. While he was thus patiently
awaiting the cessation of the rain, he was aroused by a whir of wings
evidently approaching him; and immediately after a covey of birds .
shot round the corner of the rick, closely pursued by a fine Falcon,
which knocked a bird down within forty yards of him, and was
allowed by him to’carry off its dinner in safety.
Some few years ago (about 1865) when I was living on Harnham
Bridge, within the liberty of the Close of Salisbury, I was one day
attracted by the ery of a Peewit above my head, repeated in a hurried
and piteous accent many times. On looking up, I saw the Peewit
and a fine Falcon, climbing the air in first-rate style. When I first
observed them, the Peewit was by far the highest of thetwo. The
Peewit labouring with continued efforts, and in small circles to keep
the upper position ; while the Falcon with bold and confident sweeps
ascended so quickly and so easily, that it reminded me at the time
of nothing so much asa person walking up stairs. This scene lasted
some little time, while the birds, owing to the different size of the
eircles made by them in their flight, appeared at times to be flying
exactly in contrary directions. At last the Peregrine succeeded in
gaining the ascendant, and directly it did so it made its stoop as
only a Peregrine can (which I may remark has been caleulated to
reach the amazing rapidity of one hundred and fifty miles an hour,
or even more). But the Peewit was up to the occasion, and des-
cended in circular gyrations like a corkscrew; the Falcon following
3 every turn with wonderful facility, but being unable to strike it.
102 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
A bystander then went to pick up the Peewit, which had taken
refuge in a clump of rushes, thinking that it was dead, but it had
just strength enough left to rise, and clear the bridge, when it would
have escaped, had it not begun “ Pee-witting” again in a most
foolish manner, which once more attracted the attention of the
Peregrine, who had then given up the chase. They both then dis-
appeared down the meadows, leaving the result of the chase uncertain
—but the Peewit was so tired it evidently could not mount the air
a second time, and in all probability was taken. If so the Falcon
did that which a Peregrine is very seldom able to accomplish single-
handed, as, owing to the wonderful twists and turns in the air that
the Peewit is accustomed to make, it is one of the very hardest birds
to strike. There is much more that I could add about the Peregrine,
but space forbids my doing so.
I will only say that it was recently suggested to me that the
prevalence of the Peregrine Falcon in this district might, be partially
accounted for by the escape of numerous Falcons belonging to the
Hawking Club which annually visits this neighbourhood. For my
own part I can neither corroborate nor deny this statement ; but I
doubt if it has much to do with the matter; and as long as the
spire of our noble Cathedral stands, there undoubtedly will the
Peregrines be occasionally seen, as from its great height, it affords
a most attractive and secure resting place for them. They used at
one time regularly to roost there in the winter months, but I have
never known them attempt to build on the spot. I would add, as
a concluding remark, that no year has passed within the last fifteen
years or so, without my having noticed this species once or twice
during the twelve months, in our immediate district.
Fulco Subbuteo, “the Hobby Falcon.” On the occurrence of this
species I notice in Professor Newton’s re-edition of Yarrell, the
following remarks: “ Jn Somerset Mr. Cecil Smith says that it is a
very rare bird. It does not seem to be much commoner in Dorset and
Wilts.” I am glad to be able to throw a little further light on the
subject as to the frequency of the occurrence of this pretty little
Falcon in the last-named county of Wilts. Both from my own
observation, and from the reliable testimony of others, I am able to
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 103
say that it is not uncommon, I might well-nigh say frequent, in the im-
mediate neighbourhood of Salisbury. I myself generally notice it in
my own parish of Britford more than once during the summer (and it
* cannot easily be mistaken for any other kind of hawk, on account of
its remarkable length of wing, and slender figure), and a few years
ago I remember a fine specimen being shot by Mr. Jervoise’s keeper,
in the water meadows,when he was out duck-shooting in the evening.
Mr. Hart also writes me word from Christchurch, “ Merlin and
Hobby killed frequently.” It is by no means uncommon in the New
Forest, which is on the very borders of our own county, and breeds
there annually, and I have had the young birds offered me for sale
from thence. But one reason which perhaps causes it to be less
frequently noticed than other hawks, is its habit of keeping very
late hours, which often causes it to remain on the wing almost, as
we say, in “ owl-light.” But I would remark here in passing, that
this little bird is always on legitimate business, and sets a good
example in his parish by making active use of every scrap of time
he can procure. I gained some interesting facts concerning the
occurrence of this species in our own immediate district from Mr.
Norwood, of the South Western Railway, himself a neat stuffer, and
an enthusiastic ornithologist. In the course of the summer of 1866
he had no less than four Hobbies, all male birds, brought in to him,
which had been killed or injured by the telegraph wires, between
Salisbury and Porton, a distance of some seven miles. Two of these
he received in the same week. One of the four was only injured on
the pinion, and was kept alive afterwards for some years. There was
at the time I mention only one wire up, in which case it would seem
_ toprove much more deadly to birds than when there are many. Partly
___ perhaps because then it is generally a new thing to them, and they are
not on the look out for the danger, and partly because the one is not
so easily visible as the many. And in the present year Mr. Norwood
tells me that he has just had a fine hen bird brought to him, also
_ killed in the same way, and at the same place—and here I would
notice how this singular fatality would corroborate the fact, if any
&. proof were wanting, of the late-flying propensities of this bird.
Mr. Norwood also told me an interesting instance of the extreme
104 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
rapidity of the flight of the Hobby, which is said to be able to fly
down even a swift. He was driving the express engine at the time,
which, between Porton and Salisbury, runs at the rate of some forty
miles an hour or more. While doing so he noticed a male Sparrow
Hawk flying off with some small bird in his claws. This bird at
the time was flying nearly parallel with the train, and keeping as
near as possible level with it. While watching this bird he suddenly
saw a small speck appear im the distance, which approached with
amazing rapidity, and proved to be a Hobby giving chase to the
Sparrow Hawk. This bird darted past the train almost as though
it had been stationary, and quickly catching up the Sparrow Hawk,
forced it to drop its prey, securing it, as it fell, by a kind of demi-
volte in the air, and flying off with it in triumph. The chase was
then reversed ; the unencumbered Sparrow Hawk endeavouring in
turn to overtake its now loaded antagonist; but it was a case of
* catch who can,” and the Sparrow Hawk had to go and search
for another quarry. I have in my collection a fine male specimen
of the Hobby, which came by its death in rather a peculiar manner.
The butler of a house in this neighbourhood was standing in the
garden, talking to the gamekeeper, late in the evening, when a little
green paroquet—that was sitting on his shoulder, its favourite
resting-place—began to make a very peculiar noise. “ Hallo,” eried
the butler, “There must be a hawk somewhere near ; Tommy never
makes that noise, except when he sees a hawk.” On looking up,
sure enough there was a fine Hobby flying directly over their heads.
The keeper did not attempt to fire, thinking the bird was too far
out of shot; but the butler, snatching the gun out of his hand, let
fly, and, by a snap shot, just broke the bird’s pmion—the shot being
one of the longest the keeper had ever seen. A few years ago I
was informed by a brother clergyman that this little Falcon used to
breed in the parish of Poulshot near Devizes, and doubtless there
are many other places in the county which can justly lay claim to
be breeding places of the Hobby.
Mr. Tyndall Powell, of Hurdcott House, near Salisbury, writes
me word: “It is most amusing to watch the Sand Martens come to
roost in a withy-bed close by us, in the months of September and
i oa
ks
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 105
October. They come in thousands, always prior to their migration ;
and it is a strange thing that whenever they are here in those
quantities there are sure to be several Hobbies round about the
withy-bed, sometimes quite late in the evening. I often wait for
them, and I was lucky enough to shoot a beautiful specimen (an old
hen) this year.”
Falco Rufipes, “The orange-legged Hobby.” Of this rare species
of Falcon, of which only about twenty examples have occurred in
the British Isles since 1830, when four were killed in Norfolk (as
Professor Newton, in his latest edition of Yarrell, tells us), I have
(I am sorry to say) no recent notice. Neither is Mr. Hart, of
Christchurch, able to give me any instances of their capture of late
years in the neighbourhood. Mr. Rawlence, of Wilton, however,
has, in his excellent collection of Falconide, a good pair, which
were shot in a plantation on the downs at Kingston Deverill, near
_ Warminster. This enables me to claim this species as having oc-
eurred in our county, and I also see in the Zoologist for this month
(April, 1877,) that Mr. Hayden, of Fordingbridge, ten miles from
hence, records that a specimen of the Red-Legged Hobby was
_ killed close to that place in December last, which is the more singu-
lar, as this little Falcon is a recognized summer visitant. But
besides this I am not able to say anything more about them.
They are at the best but stragglers to our shores, and do not seem
_ to be more frequent in the adjoining countries of the continent;
their true home appearing to be in the East of Europe, where they
sometimes occur in large flocks, not only of tens, but of hundreds.
_ Falco Tinnunculus, “The Kestrel.” This bird still remains
‘common in our immediate neighbourhood, though, from my own
observation, I should say it is scarcely to be so frequently met with
as it was some ten or twelve yearsago. And here I would fain plead
against its wholesale destruction, for, as a rule, it is surely more or less
-innocuous—taking the place by day of the owl by night, and living
chiefly on mice, frogs, and beetles. It will doubtless occasionally vary
its diet with a second or third course of game, but only when it is
very young and tender. I have in my own collection a fine grey
5 male bird, that was taken in a gin by one of the Clarendon keepers.
4
wt
106 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
When first disturbed it was feeding upon a little leveret, only a
day or two old; but, baiting the gin with the remainder, the keeper
caught the bird the next morning on its usual round to the same
spot. Here is the exception that proves the rule. But I would
remind the reader it is not on the birds of prey alone that the charge
must be laid of diminishing the game list. Many another bird, outside
the Order “ Raptores,” would be quite unable to resist the temptation
of making a mouthful of a newly-hatched Pheasant or Partridge—
as an illustration of which propensity I may mention that I re-
member seeing an old Spanish hen, in my possession, gobble up two
fully-fledged wrens, one after another, whose maiden flight from the
nest was most unfortunately taken into the midst of her pen. I
remember also that the head keeper at Clarendon told me one day
that ke looked upon the red-backed Shrike as one of his most de-
termined enemies, for he had more than once seen it dart down on
a newly-hatched Pheasant, and kill it with one blow on the head from
its wedge-shaped bill. And besides these examples there are un-
doubtedly many other unsuspected cannibals, who now and then
show no respect to the weaklings of the feathered race. It is re-
markable how quickly birds are attracted to the same spot by any
of their own species, though previously they may have been for a
long while unnoticed in the neighbourhood. In 1870 a tame Kestrel
of mine made its escape, and for three or four days after several
Kestrels remained clese to the Vicarage, apparently in attendance
on the escaped prisoner, which must (I think) eventually have flown
off with them, as afterwards I saw no more of it or them. It is
interesting to observe how both birds and animals of opposing
natures seem to enter into a tacit agreement to respect mutually each
others domains, when they happen to take up their domicile in the
same quarters—As an instance a friend of mine, when a boy at
Marlborough, found in the same tree, a Missel-Thrush’s nest, a
Kestrel’s, and a Squirrel’s draw, all close together, and mutually
respected. Mr. Hart was mentioning to me the other day the
marked difference that existed between the flight of the male and
female Kestrel, by which he could generally detect at a distance
the sexes of the birds: the male bird delighting to shoot through
: In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 107
the air with a motion peculiar to itself, having the shoulders of the
wings more or less tightly compressed against its side; while the
female adopted a more regular, and measured mode of flight. A
Kestrel crossed us at some distance when I was out with him, which
he at once pronounced to be a female, from the style of its flight.
Falco Afsalon, “The Merlin.” On extending my enquiries con-
cerning the prevalence of this little Falcon, I find that it is far more
frequently to be met with in this district than I at first anticipated.
I have met with one instance of it coming under my own observation
in this parish; but from never having seen it before in these parts,
and not even knowing of its prevalence, I, at the time, mistook it
_ for a Kestrel—though I have no doubt now it was a hen Merlin.
It was in the autumn months, some six years ago, that in crossing
_ Longford Park I witnessed a most exciting chase between this bird
and a Skylark. The pursuit lasted for some time, during which I
counted no less than fourteen stoops that the Falcon made at the
Lark. In each case it was unsuccessful. The Lark mounting above
the Faleon so quickly, and with such apparent ease, that I am quite
doubtful about the result of the chase, which was hidden from me
by the trees. Mr. Hayden, of Fordingbridge, once offered me a fine
_ male bird in adult plumage, for which he asked me the high price
_ of two guineas, on account of the rarity of so perfectly plumaged a
bird being killed in the immediate neighbourhood; while at the
same time he sold me a fine specimen of the male Hobby for seven-
and-sixpence; the difference in price sufficiently illustrating the
comparative rarity of the two species in this district. On consulting
‘Mr. Hart, of Christchurch, however, he writes me word: “ Merlin
and Hobby killed frequently :” and on making a second enquiry of
him concerning the prevalence of the Merlin in these parts, he
writes : “I find the Merlin is nearly as often killed as the Hobby.
. Possibly the Hobby may be killed oftener, but it does not find its
way to me.” Since this, I may add, I have seen Mr. Hart per-
-sonally, who corroborated his assertion by showing me several fine
Merlins he had himself shot within the last year or two—one of
which (a male in perfect plumage) he killed; while attacking some
of his own rents This latter bird is in exceptionally fine plumage
108 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
—the usual cross-bars being entirely absent on the blue tail, which
thus presents much the same appearance as that in the male Kestrel.
From what I have said I think it will be plain that the Merlin is
by no means altogether a stranger with us, and without doubt it
occasionally breeds in the New Forest; but I still think, from my
own observation, that the Hobby is certainly far more frequently to
be met with in these parts than the Merlin.
Since writing the above account of the Merlin, I have received
farther information of the occurrence of that species in this locality.
Thus Mr. Tyndall Powell, of Hurdcott, informs me that his father
shot a beautiful specimen, a male bird, in November, 1876. Another,
a female, was sent me for my collection, also killed at Hurdcott, on
January 2nd, 1877, by Mr. Tyndall Powell, who farther informs me
that a second male Merlin was brought into the bird-stuffer’s at
Warminster, much about the same date as the male bird mentioned
above; while the same gentleman writes me word that while out
shooting, on January 13th, 1877, with Mr. Wyndham, of Dinton,
he found a -beautiful specimen of the Merlin, a female, far better
and brighter in plumage than the one he sent me as recorded above,
hung up by the head on the keeper’s gallows, which was just too
far gone for preservation, the keeper having killed it about a
fortnight before in the neighbouring plantation. These four occur-
rences, as mentioned above, all occurring during the present winter
season, in this immediate district, would tend to prove that the
the Merlin is by no means so uncommon in South Wilts during
winter months, as I at first thought, or in any case, that there has
been an unusual immigration of them amongst us in the present
winter of 1876-77.
Astur Palumbarius, “The Gos-Hawk.” Leaving now the true
Falcons, distinguished, as all bird-lovers know, by the notched bill,
the sharp-pointed wing, and the dark iris of the eye, from all other
birds of prey, we come next to the Hawks, of which there are only
two species to be met with in this country, and of both of which I
have somewhat to record. The first to be mentioned is the “ Gos-
Hawk,” which species, as I need hardly say, is now very rare
amongst us; though I see, in Professor Newton’s new edition of
Fan ela se
ed
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 109
Yarrell that the capture of five examples in Suffolk, and of eleven
in Norfolk, have been recorded, occurring mostly within the last few
years. I can once again claim this now rare bird as having of late
years visited our more immediate neighbourhood ; though I feel (as
in the case of the “ Lanner Falcon”) that some persons may be
prepared to be almost incredulous on the point. I can however but
relate my experience, and let the circumstances speak for themselves.
Some few years ago a Captain Dugmore visited the city of Salisbury.
He was very enthusiastic on the subject of hawking, and had with
him at the time of his visit three Peregrine Falcons, two Goshawks,
a Merlin, anda Hobby. I was out with him one day hawking in
our water-meadows, when he mentioned the following incident :
he was using the female Goshawk at the time, and he told me how
quickly he could discern the presence of any other hawk in the air,
from the manner and cry of the tame bird while on his wrist, and
he then said, “ Yesterday, the Goshawk on my wrist became un-
usually excited, and on looking up I saw a wild Goshawk flying in
a straight course over my head.” He said he had no doubt as to
the identity of the bird, as he knew it so well from so constantly
_ hawking with the same species. Why this should not indeed have
been a veritable “Gos,” it is for others to declare, the burden of
_ disproof lying evidently, I think, with them. And here I cannot
: help mentioning a flight which I witnessed in the water-meadows
with this same bird. It was thrown off after a Coot, which flew
‘rather high in the air, keeping straight up the course of the river.
The Hawk struck the Coot, and binding together they fell into the deep
‘water. The Coot now did all in its power to dive, and so far succeeded
as to immerse the Gos-hawk up to its neck in the water. On my
e pressing a fear that the Hawk would be drowned, my friend re-
| plied that a Goshawk knew well how to take care of itself in the
Ww ater, whereas, had it been aPeregrine it might have very likely shared
a different fate. After this the two birds floated down the stream
in this way for a hundred yards or more, when a convenient opening
in the weeds appearing, the Goshawk gave itself a wrench, and got
110 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
and dry its feathers for an hour before it was fit for another flight.
This bird was of a very sulky disposition, and at times refused to take
any notice of the quarry after which it was thrown. But perhaps it
had scarcely recovered the results of its education, which was, at the
time I mention, barely concluded, and certainly not conducive to
good temper: for it had consisted, in part, of its having been kept
awake persistently for several days and nights together, my friend
having hired an old couple in Salisbury to keep watch over it in
turns, and- prevent its snatching so much as a wink of sleep, by
tickling its nostrils with a feather when inclined to doze. Had any
of my readers been placed under the same regimen, I doubt whether
their tempers would have fared much better. As to any other oc-
currence of this rare bird in our more immediate neighbourhood I
have no information, and think myself fortunate in being able to
speak of it at all, in any way. I would mention that Mr. Rawlence
has a splendid specimen of the adult female Goshawk in his collection
at Wilton, which is well worth seeing. This bird is reported to have
come from the North of England, together with the Greenland
Falcon before mentioned, but I can gain no further evidence con-
cerning them, as to either date or place.
Accipitur Nisus, “The Sparrow Hawk.” On coming to speak of
our well-known friend, the Sparrow Hawk, of course a good deal
might be said—as undoubtedly should our attention be drawn by
anyone to some bird of prey in the air, the chances are that it will
turn out to be either a Kestrel, or a female Sparrow Hawk. And
in passing it is curious to observe what confusion there is in many
a gamekeeper’s mind, who of all other men one would have supposed
should have known better, concerning these species, and other birds
of prey—iu some districts Kestrels being called Sparrow Hawks,
and in others, Sparrow Hawks Kestrels; while if you try to un-
deceive them, your efforts will generally receive some such conclusive
remark as this, which allows of no appeal: “ Please, Sir, we do
always call ’em Sparrow Hawks down here, and what you call
Sparrow Hawks we do call Kestrels.” In this district the Sparrow
Hawk is still common, though woefully persecuted, and it is a happy
bird, which is able to build, and rear its young in safety. Some
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 111
little time ago a hen bird flew off with a thrush, which she captured
just in front of my dining-room window ; and a few days afterwards
another thrush flew violently against the plate-glass of the same
window, leaving a halo of feathers in the air, and killed itself on
the spot, as though chased by the same bird.
_ I remember, when a school-boy at Winchester, seeing a little
male bird of this species, which a lad had killed with a stone in
“Double Hedge,” as it was called. It was the most beautifully-
plumaged bird I have ever seen, and I have never met with its equal
in any collection. The back was of the darkest slate colour, almost
approaching black; while the entire breast and under parts were
bright rufous—the rufous being so continuous, as almost to obscure
altogether the usual bars to the edge of the feathers, and so pre-
senting to the casual observer a nearly uniform orange-coloured
surface. It is curious that the nestlings of this species when first
hatched, should be covered with a perfectly white down, thus sharing
a similar garb to that of the young of the Golden Eagle and Honey
Buzzard. In mentioning this species I cannot help relating an
anecdote which was told me when I was curate of Bishops Lydeard,
near Taunton, a note of which I made long ago in sundry notices of
_ birds I was keeping at the time. A gamekeeper discovered a
Sparrow Hawk’s nest not far from the parish in which I was then
residing, and shot the hen bird. Concluding he had destroyed the
nest, he thought no more about the matter, until in three or four
_ days’ time, he noticed that another hen bird had filled the place of
the one that he had killed. This bird he also shot—when, once
again, a third hen bird was brought to the nest, which quickly
_ shared the same fate as its two predecessors. The keeper was now
- induced to watch the nest narrowly, and in the course of the summer
he shot no less than e/even hen birds at the same nest, when at last
he killed the little cock bird, by mistake, and “ the tale was told.”
- Milvus Regalis, “The Kite.” ‘This fine bird, once the character-
_ istic bird of the country, and the terror of each poultry yard and
_ farmer’s wife in every county, is now, alas! conspicuous only by its
_ absence. The only occasion on which I can remember to have
_ myself seen it, was when I was a school-boy at Hammersmith, in
112 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
the year 1845 or 1846. A large bird was then pointed out to me
soaring over our heads, far above the noise and tumult of the great
city, and I was told it was a Kite. Would that I could see the
sight again! Mr. Rawlence has in his collection one of the last
Kites recorded as having been killed in Wiltshire. The bird was
shot many years ago at Kingston Deverill, and a fine specimen it is.
Mr. Norwood tells me he saw one in 1860, soaring high in the air
in the Yeovil district; but has seen no sign of one since. About
the year 1848, however, he took a Kite’s nest in Wadenhoe (?)
Wood, in Northamptonshire, and then they were far from uncommon
there. But on writing a few years ago to endeavour to obtain a
specimen from that place, the only answer returned was the date on
which the last bird had been killed, and the assurance that there had
not been one seen there since. Mr. Hart informs me that the last
specimen of the Kite which he has seen, or heard of, in the neigh-
bourhood, passed through his hands in the year 1851. This bird
was killed near Christchurch, and is now in his own collection. It is_
a remarkable ruddy and richly-coloured specimen. There is still
some evidence of their breeding in Wales, and probably in one or two
places in Scotland, but nowhere else in Great Britain. Their place
in the New Forest, alas! knows them no more. I would observe
in passing, that there is no greater proof of the commonness of
this fine bird in former times throughout the length and breadth of
the country, and of its unequalled power of poising itself high in
mid-air, than the fact that each school-boy is yet familiar with its
name, though he has never seen it, and still vainly attempts to
emulate its flight with his paper counterpart.
Buteo Vulgaris, “The common Buzzard.” This species still more
or less deserves its title, “common ;” in any case as compared with
its other two congeners, which are indigenous to us. I have a fine
male bird, killed at Pomeroy, near Bradford, in this county, which
was then in the possession of Captain Sainsbury, of Bathford, and
also a female bird, killed in Lincolnshire, by my cousin, Mr. F. F.
Morres, This latter bird was sent down to me as being a veritable
Kite, and great was my excitement as I carefully uncovered the
wrapping to catch the first glimpse of its forked tail—but, alas!
~
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 113
(as I more than half feared) it turned out to be but a Jackdaw
in Peacock’s feathers, and although an unusually fine specimen
of Buteo Vulgaris, of no comparative value in the eyes of a
modern collector. On showing one of these specimens to one
of my poorer parishioners he burst forth with the somewhat
amusing remark: “Lor, Sir, sure that bird’s h’apropos to an
h’eagle”—which remark he also passed on a similar occasion,
when I was pointing out to him a fine male Capercailzie. The
strongly-curved bill of the cone-cracking Rasor being apparently
too much for his simple imagination. Mr. Hart writes me word,
“The common Buzzard we get frequently from the [New] Forest.”
And there are numerous specimens in various local collections, all
differing considerably in plumage, but retaining more or less the one
characteristic of this bird, the barred tail.
_ Buteo Lagopus, “The Rough-Legged Buzzard.” This species is
certainly by far the rarest of the three sorts which are indigenous to
us—anyhow in this district. In 1857, Mr. Hart informs me, he re-
received two specimens for preservation; since which time (now
nearly twenty years ago), he has seen and heard nothing of them
until the autumn of last year 1875, when he wrote: “We also
fortunately got two Rough-Legged Buzzards, here at Christchurch,
the first on November, the 25th, and the other a few days later.”
These are the only specimens I have heard of recently. Mr.
Rawlence has a fine bird, in its characteristic plumage, which is
subject to far less variation than the other two species. This bird
was killed on the Longleat estate, near Warminster; but with the
exact date of the capture of this specimen he is unable to furnish
me. I would mention also that Mr. Ferryman, of Redlynch, near
here, has a good specimen of this bird in his collection, if my
memory serves me right, as well as almost all the other species of
the Falconide.
Since writing this paper I am able to record the capture of four
“more specimens of the Rough-legged Buzzard in Wilts. They were
__ all trapped in a large wood at Fonthill, and a fifth bird of the same
species was also seen about at the same time, but escaped destruction.
All these captures occurred in the last week of December, 1876.
_ VOL. XVII.—NO. XLIX. I
114 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
Indeed it is remarkable what an unusual number of occurrences of
this species as well as of the Merlin, and the Short-Eared Owl,
have been recorded from various parts of the country during the
past winter, 1876—77.
Pernis Apiworus, “The Honey Buzzard.”’ This, the third species
of Buzzard which is indigenous to us, though rare in many parts of
the country, was, up to quite a recent date, a bird of yearly occurrence:
in these parts. It used to breed annually in the New Forest, year
by year, and both Mr. Hayden, of Fordingbridge, and Mr. Rawlence,
of Wilton, have fine specimens of it, with eggs, nest, and young.
But such a noble bird as this could not long escape detection in
these days, even in the friendly recesses of the New Forest; and of
late years, as surely as a nest was discovered, the whole brood was
certain to be exterminated—eggs, old birds, and young quickly
falling a prey before the rapacity of collectors. Perhaps it is un-
avoidable ; if so, we can only say, the more the pity. The consequence
however is, that there has been no nest in the Forest for the last
four or five years, though the adult birds are still not unfrequently
met with: but each year perceptibly thins their ranks, and
doubtless this species will, ere long, have to be reckoned as merely
an occasional straggler to our neighbourhood. Mr. Hart’s list of
specimens which have passed through his hands sufficiently proves
this. During the last twenty years he has had eighteen specimens
brought in to him, occurring more and more sparsely as the decades
run on. Thus, two specimens occurred in 1857; two in 1858;
four in 1859; two in 1860; four in 1861; one in 1862; one
in 1863; and then comes a very considerable gap, as the next
occurrence was one in 1871, and one in 1875. This indeed does
not represent all the specimens occurring near here during the
above-named period, as Mr. Hayden, of Fordingbridge, has also
received numerous specimens from the surrounding district, although
he tells me that for the last few years he has not had any brought
to him. Thus, from what I have said above though the numbers —
mentioned afford a marked contrast to those of the Rough-legged
Buzzard, which have been recorded during the same period, yet
facts point to the evident conclusion that ere long the one species
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 115
will become almost, if not quite, as rare as the other. In 1867 I had
a fine female Honey Buzzard, sent me alive, which had been captured
at Eastbourne, having only been very slightly injured on the pinion.
This bird was of a uniform chocolate-brown, not a single feather of
any other colour being apparent. On receiving it I had great doubt
as to whether I should kill it at once, and so perpetuate it in my
collection, as its plumage was in beautiful condition—or whether I
should endeavour to keep it alive through its autumn moult, which
I felt would be more or less impracticable. However as I could not
find it in my heart to kill it, I adopted the latter course, and for a
time I was well rewarded. It grew very tame, and used to feed off
my wrist like a trained falcon. But, alas! as I had all along foreseen,
it perished in its autumn moult, and became such a mere bag of
feathers, that I had to throw it away, without being able in any
way to preserve it, or any part of it. I noticed in this bird the
usual characteristic of its species—that, however darkly-coloured
the bird may be, each feather is perfectly white at its base; a
peculiarity which is declared before-hand, by the nestling, when
newly-hatched, being covered with perfectly white down.
Cireus Rufus, “The Marsh Harrier.” Last in order amongst
the Faleconide we come to the Harriers—the link between the
Hawks and the Owls—of which also there are three British species,
by far the rarest of which, in this and the neighbouring districts, is
the Marsh Harrier, or “ Moor Buzzard,” as it has sometimes been
called. This species is known to vary greatly in plumage, according
to age, which at one time caused many mistakes to be made about it.
It is now uncommon in the Salisbury district, and for my own part I
have never met with one near here. Mr. Rawlence, however, has
three specimens, all from Wiltshire, one of them having been obtained
near this city, and the other two from Kingston Deverill, near
_ Warminster. Mr. Norwood, of Salisbury has also a fine pair of
these birds but not local, as also has Mr. Hayden, of Fording-
bridge, a mile or two only from our border ; while Mr. Hart informs
me that he shot a fine pair of these birds himself, at Christchurch,
in November, 1874, while one of the sailors a few days before killed
a very richly-coloured bird of the same species. Last year also
12
116 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
Mr. Hart had two other Marsh Harriers brought to him,and another in
1872, so that, though uncommon, they are not yet unknown amongst
us. Their real home, however, would seem to be in the South-East
of Europe, where they are said to abound in numbers.
Circus Cyaneus, “The Hen Harrier.” On coming to this species,
with its mate, the “ Ring Tail,” I can speak from personal obser-
vation, as scarcely a winter passes without its visiting our parish.
I have noticed the male bird, in its adult grey plumage, and still
oftener the female quartering our fields for its prey in its own
methodical fashion; and once, when out shooting, J saw one of
these birds carry off a partridge from the field in which I was, in
the early part of September. Last winter a fine Ringtail flew over
my head, on the Odstock Road, and settled on a hurdle, about eighty
or ninety yards from me, and not long ago a Ringtail was picked
up near here, on a fallow. It had been dead some little time, and on
being skinned was found to have flown off with twelve shots in its
body ; but it was in sufficiently good condition to admit of its being
preserved. In the winter of 1873-4 a fine male bird in full plumage
was seen by one of the farmers of this parish regularly for some weeks
running, every Sunday, as he drove to Church, but rarely on any other
day. This may seem a strange fatality, (but with many other similar
instances) can be accounted for, from the greater quietness of the fields
and country which allows them on that day to issue forth from their
hiding-places with a greater feeling of security. My parishioner
was very interested in birds, and he did all he could to procure it,
both by trapping, and lying in wait for it. But it was too wary
for him, and succeeded eventually in leaving the neighbourhood in
safety, after a prolonged sojourn amongst us, with its mate, for
several weeks. They are frequently to be met with also on the large
downs between this and Cranbourne Chase, and without doubt
occasionally breed there; and, owing to the great gorse covers which
are to be found on many of our downs, they seem likely, I think, to
hold their own amongst us, better than most other of our larger
birds of prey. I remember also on another occasion seeing a fine
adult Hen Harrier quartering a turnip field, near Wokingham, in
Berkshire, which first attracted my own and my friend’s attention
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 117
as appearing to be an unusually light-coloured Woodpigeon, but a
second glance soon undeceived us.
Circus Montagui, ‘‘Montagu’s Harrier,’ This third species of
Harrier would seem to be far the commonest of the three, in the
neighbourhood of Christchurch, and doubtless is frequently mistaken,
notwithstanding its slighter build, for the former one. I am not
aware that I have ever seen it in this district, but I do not
feel at all certain on the point; and a fine female was killed by the
head keeper at Clarendon, close to this city, in 1873. This specimen
he has preserved in his own cottage, together with a Buzzard,
Peregrine Falcon, and Sparrow Hawk, in one case, all killed in the
neighbourhood about the same time. On referring to Mr. Hart, I
get some very full information concerning the prevalence of this
species near Christchurch. Since 1869 he has had no less than
seventeen specimens brought in to him, viz. : two specimens in 1869,
seven in 1870, four in 1874, one in 1875, three in 1876; while one
of the Forest keepers has killed no less than five specimens of the
species during the past summer. This proves that this species is
far commoner in that immediate district than its congener—the
Hen Harrier ; for the district around is especially suited to its habits,
consisting (as it does), of a very large expanse of open broken
ground, covered with heather and gorse, intermingled with
marsh,
When in the neighbourhood of Taunton, I remember a very
practical illustration, in connection with the species, of the old
proverb, that “a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.” A
friend of mine about the year 1860, wounded a fine adult male of
this species, on Cothelston Hill, part of the Quantock range. When
captured it proved to be so slightly wounded, that my friend de-
termined, if possible, to keep it alive; and with this intention,
while at lunch, secured it with great care by a strong piece of
string attached to its leg, which he made fast to a sapling
hard by. He then went into the house to enjoy his luncheon
with double “gusto,” at the idea of having captured, to him,
so valuable a prize, as it was a specimen he especially wanted
for his collection, which he had determined to limit, by adding to it
118 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
only birds of his own killing. But on coming forth from his repast
his digestion was sadly spoilt by there being no signs whatever left
of Circus Montagui, saving the strong string to which it had been
attached; neither could he anywhere discover it, though he spent
most of the remaining afternoon in searching for it. Mr. Rawlence
has in his collection a fine pair of Montagu Harriers, with three
young birds, only a few days old when taken from the nest. These
came from Fordingbridge, about ten miles hence. The nestlings
are very different in colour, two being perfectly white, and one very
blue—thus showing, at this early period, the difference between the
two sexes. As is well-known the male bird of this species, with
that of the Hen Harrier, does not acquire the adult plumage of
maturity until the autumn moult of the year after they have left
the nest, and not in the same year. So that it is interesting that
the down of the nestling should thus give early evidence of the sex
of the bird, while directly afterwards it assumes, for some considerable
time, the appearance and garb of the female.
STRIGIDZ.
We come now to those ill-omened birds of night, the Owls—
holding a dubious character in mens’ minds, of traditionary wisdom,
yet foreboding evil. Mysterious denizens of the forest and the
“solitary place ”—often heard, but seldom seen—so that many
an individual of the species passes his sequestered life, without once
introducing himself to his nearest human neighbour. Not that we
need pity the shunned and fateful bird, for doubtless he enjoys his
midnight orgies, quite as much as his sunnier friends their morning
carols, and in cheerfully carrying out his allotted task, though it be
in the dark, enjoys the peace of a good conscience, which makes the
hardest fate tolerable.
‘But to come to facts. There are ten species of Owls, inhabitants
or visitants of our island, seven of which, at least, I can claim as
* county members.”
=
a
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 119
Bubo Maximus, “The Eagle Owl.” This bird seems naturally to
head the list, being the largest and most powerful of all its tribe
not only in the Old World but in the New as well; the American
bird, the Virginian Eagle Owl being rather smaller that its European
congener. There is an authentically recorded capture of one of these
fine birds on Handley Common, on the borders of this county.
This bird was captured alive and kept for some time by a Mr. King,
of Alvediston. It came then into the possession of Mr. Hayter, of
Woodyates, who writes thus to me concerning it: “ In reference to
the Eagle Owl—I have a very beautiful one, but I am afraid I
eannot give you as much information about the bird as you would
wish. It belonged to Thomas King, Esq., of Alvediston, Wilts,
and about the year 1853 or 1854 I had it from him; and I know
he had the bird alive for some years, perhaps seven or eight, and
then it died. I never heard from him how he became possessed of
it, but I believe I have heard some one say that Mr. King thought
it must have escaped from some menagerie.” I would remark that
this is the immediate and somewhat natural conclusion concerning
every very rare bird which is captured amongst us. But let us
remember it does not, of necessity, always follow that it is the right
conclusion to draw.
Otus Vulgaris, ‘ ong-Eared Owl.” This may be reckoned as
being one of our commoner Wiltshire birds; and there would be but
little difficulty in procuring specimens either of old birds or young.
I remember hearing on one occasion that, in a copse near here,
called the “ Great Yews,” belonging to the Earl of Radnor, (a copse
on the open down, consisting of some acres, formed entirely of ancient
yew trees, almost any one of which would be a grand feature in any
of our parish churchyards,) that as many as eleven of these birds
were started from the same tree, having congregated together during
the hard weather in the winter months. At one time I had four of
- these birds alive, which I kept for some months, and found them
by far the most vivacious and quarrelsome of any of the Owl tribe
_ that I have had anything to do with. My aviary, at the time lam
speaking of, may strike some of my readers as being rather a curious
one, consisting as it did, of four Long-Eared Owls, two Brown
120 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
Owls, one White or Barn Owl, a Honey Buzzard, a Raven, and a
Kestrel. I am sorry to add that the fate of the Long-Eared Owls
was a tragic one—one night they had apparently a pitched battle,
as in the morning I found two out of the four dead. The next
night a third also demised, and the fourth, which I suppose was the
strongest of the lot, I at once executed, having it now preserved in
my collection. ;
Otus Brachyotos, “ Short-Eared Owl.” This species is also not
unfrequently met with in this district, but not so commonly or regu-
larly as the former bird. I had a fine specimen brought me-alive
some years ago, which had been captured in rather a peculiar manner.
The old “ Drowner” (as the man is called in these parts who floods
the water-meadows—an appellation which sounded formidably in
the ears of a friend of mine, who was one day caught bathing in a
tempting but forbidden place by the aforesaid functionary, and who,
to a question from my friend in the water, returned the answer from
the bank above him, that he was “the Drowner,”’) told me he had
caught a fine bird alive for me, such as he had never seen before,
and that he kad got it in a tub, unhurt. What led to its detection
was its bright yellow eye, peering out from a bunch of rushes, and
the old man cautiously making a circuit, bent the rushes over it,
with a prong that he happened to have in his hand, and secured it.
It was a fine Short-Eared Owl, and was feeding upon a Dabchick,
which it had just caught—which says a good deal, I think, for
Owlish dexterity, as you do not often catch a Dabchick asleep.
This bird showed a marked difference to the Long-Eared species in
disposition. It seemed quite tame; and let me stroke it and handle
it without any opposition.. It may have but lately arrived from its
migration, as shortly after, another specimen was picked up dead in
the neighbouring parish of Coombe Bissett, and brought to me. I
may add that another fine specimen of this bird was sent me in
November, 1876, which had been trapped near Bathford. I notice
that this species is called by Meyer, in his book of British Birds,
“the Hawk Owl,’ which unfortunately confounds it with Surnia
Ulula, ‘The Canadian Owl,” which is also generally called by the
same name, and of which I have somewhat to say in its turn.
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 121
Strix Flammea, “White or Barn Owl.” We come now to the
commonest, but one of the most beautiful of the Owl tribe, which
is often called the “ Screech Owl,” owing to the peculiar and grating
ery that it makes, as it glides from the nestling ivy, or the sombre
tower, into the still calmness of a summer evening sky. Everyone
knows and has seen the Barn Owl, with its Quixotic and triangular
visage —looking, as it draws itself up on its perch, with a side-long
action, as though to get a better view of you, like some knock-kneed
shrivelled old man. It is (I rejoice to say) quite common, and
deserves to be preserved very strictly ; as it is often asserted, and
with perfect truth, that one Barn Owl will catch more mice than
six cats. One of these birds was brought to me in the spring which
had been caught while flying round one of the lamps in Salisbury ;
but the poor thing was injured, and I was obliged to kill it and turn
it into a fire-screen—for which purpose no birds look better than
any of our four commoner sorts of Owls. I have kept many of
them in confinement, but they do not stand it well, at least when
captured as old birds, and I shall never forget the screech of delight
with which one of these birds greeted me, as he flew from my
hand, when, after having kept him some three months or so, I re-
solved one summer evening to give him back his liberty. In
connection with this species I once noticed a very curious circum-
stance, for which I never can to this day account. It happened in
the autumn of the year 1859. I was travelling from Wells to
Glastonbury at the time, a distance of some six miles, and between .
those two points I noticed no less than four White Owls, at a dis-
tance of a mile or so from each other, either settled on the rail that
fenced in the line, or flying close to it. I never could account for
the reason that caused such a spontaneous neglect of the ordinary
Owlish rules, or what could have been the cause of their unusual
appearance at mid-day. In connection with this bird I always re-
member one of those occurrences when there is but a hair’s breadth
between life and death, but which, when passed, we are apt so
quickly to forget. Some years ago I was exploring some of the
gorges of the Mendip Hills, when I was attracted by an inviting-
looking crevice, some considerable height above me, which promised
122 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
to be a likely haunt for some light-hating fowl. I immediately
ascended the face of the rock, carrying in my hand a long ashen
rod of some twelve or fifteen feet, wherewith to probe the hidden
interstices of the recess. But just as I gained the desired level, my
foot slipped, and for a moment I was balancing in mid-air, without
the least certainty which direction the impetus would eventually
take. Had it been backward, in all probability, I should never have
been penning these lines, but a good Providence ordained it to be
forwards. I. shall never forget that moment of suspense, which
dwells still on my memory like some dread vision of the night. On
recovering myself, and applying my ashen rod to the furthest ex-
tremity of the crevice, I was rewarded by a White Owl ftying right
at my face, which I beat down with my hands, and successfully
captured. I took the bird home with me to Wells, and after ex-
hibiting him with his droll visage to my friends, I resolved to let
him go again. On doing which he most curiously flew directly into
the passage of a house where a person was lying at the point of
death: and I could not help pondering on the strong impression that
this untoward circumstance would have made on some of those good
folks who are given to superstition.
Ulula Stridula, “The Tawny or Brown Owl.” It is to this bird
that we are so much indebted for those melodious hootings, that
enliven the otherwise monotonous silence of the night. I have often
kept these birds alive, and when I kept a pair in my garden, here
at the Vicarage, they attracted their comrades I should think for some
considerable distance round. While I had them we had such a chorus
of wild Brown Owls, hooting and snapping all round the house,
that it would have driven anyone but an ornithologist frantic. I
must say that it amused and delighted me extremely, and one evening
I counted no less than four wild birds hooting in different keys, and
from different quarters, but apparently all in close proximity to the
prisoners. But my parishioners did not, all of them, share my
enthusiasm, and I heard several indistinct murmurs from some of
my more immediate neighbours, concerning the wringing the necks
of my tame birds, as they declared they could not get a wink of
sleep on account of the Owlish concert that was thus gratuitously
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 123
given by them almost every evening. ,They certainly laid claim to
the prerogative assigned to them in those verses of Barry Cornwall :—
‘‘We know not alway, who are Kings of the day,
But the King of the Night is the bold Brown Owl.’’
Yes! and a bold fellow he truly is—and I wish I could justly
urge as much in the cause of his preservation as in that of his first
cousin, the Barn Owl; but I am afraid truth will not let me do so
—for at times they are most destructive to other birds. As an
instance of which I can quote, from personal knowledge, that a friend
of mine in Cornwall lost one season no less than seventy-two newly-
hatched Wild Ducks, the mystery of whose disappearance he could
not for some time solve, until at last he discovered some of the
remains of the unfortunate ducklings beneath a fine old elm tree on
the edge of the pond, where a pair of Brown Owls had their nest;
and on further examination of the castings thrown up by those
birds, no doubt remained of the matter. But such was the veneration
of the master of the house for all species of the Ow] tribe, that, if
- my memory serves me aright, they escaped their well-merited doom,
and the future broods of ducklings were more carefully tended. I
took a pair of these birds last year from the nest, in this parish,
which were, I suppose, about one third grown. But what struck
me at the time particularly was the excessive cleanliness of the place,
for you could scarcely call it a nest, from which I took them. There
were neither feathers, castings, nor faces of any kind in the place
where they were located. They were nestling on some rotten wood
inside a deep recess of a limb of a tree which had been blown off,
and I could only account for the fact, at the time, by supposing that
the parent birds had but just removed them from the original nest
into this, their drawing-room; but I do not know whether it is
customary for these birds ever so to change their place of abode,
should it become in any way dangerous to safety, or possibly un-
pleasant from long inhabitation.
Surnia Ulula, “The Hawk ” or “ Canadian Owl.” I come now
to mention this bird, of which Wiltshire, I believe, contains the
only European specimen as yet recorded. This species is an
124 On the Occurrence, of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
inhabitant of northern latitudes, and is found in Canada, as also in
Sweden, and the North of Europe. The individual specimen I have
mentioned is now in the possession of Mr. Rawlence, of Wilton,
‘having been presented to him by Mr. Long, of Amesbury, who is
now residing at Coombe Bissett, near here. On writing to him on
the subject he kindly sent me the following reply: “I am sorry I
cannot fix the exact date when either myself or my younger brother
killed the bird in question. All I can answer for is that it was —
killed in the parish of Amesbury, and it is some years since. My
brother died in 1853, and I am nearly positive it was before his
death. I remember it was in severe weather. I did not know of
its rarity till Mr. Rawlence chanced to see it, and I felt great
pleasure in giving it to him to add to his beautiful collection.”
This bird was exhibited at the Zoological Society of London, on
the 4th of April last (1876), as being the only authentic specimen
of the European Hawk Owl yet recorded, as having been killed in
England. There are one or two other instances of its capture, and
one or two only, but they have occurred on the western coasts of our
island, giving rise at once to the conjecture that they had been
blown across the Atlantic by some storm from America. So that
from what has been said Wiltshire alone can apparently boast of
possessing a true specimen of the Swedish Hawk Owl up to this date.
Strix Nyctea, ‘Snowy Owl.” I must perforce acknowledge that
I mention this bird only with a view to make my list complete. It
is the only one of the Owls concerning which I can gather xo district
news at all. Mr. Rawlence has a fine specimen of this bird, as well
as myself, but they are not local—mine having been brought over
from Canada, where it had been killed by the Indians.
Strie Passerina, “The Little Owl’ I come now, in conclusion,
to the mention of the three smaller kinds of Owls, all of which are
but rare visitants to our island, and concerning only one of which I
am able to gain much information. Mr. Hart writes me word: “I
do not think either the ‘ Scops,” Tengmalms, or ‘ Little Owl’ have
been killed within ten years near here.” But he has in his own
collection a very nice specimen of the “ Little Owl,” that was killed
in the neighbourhood of the New Forest, some twenty years ago or
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 125
more, but he cannot fix date, or circumstances. I also have a
specimen of this bird in my own collection, but it was killed by a
friend of mine on the opposite coast of Brittany, and I cannot prove
that it flew over there from Wiltshire.
Noctua Tengmalmi, “Tengmalm’s Owl.” Concerning the oc-
eurrence of this bird, Mr. Hart is able to give me a more recent
notice, but he is unfortunately unable to recall the exact circum-
stances attaching to it. He distinctly remembers however a specimen
of this bird passing through his hands for preservation about twelve
years ago. But he has no note concerning it, and he cannot
perfectly recall where it went to, but he has no doubt that it was
killed somewhere in the immediate neighbourhood.! In size and
colouring this little bird is not at all unlike Strie Passerina, but it
can be distinguished at a glance by its thickly-feathered tarsi and feet.
Scops Aldrovandi, “The Scops Eared Owl.” Of this most
beautifully-pencilled little bird, I have several notices, I am glad to
say. One of them was shot by Mr. E. Rawlence, in the spring of
1873, in Wilton Park, and presented by him to the Earl of Pembroke.
This little bird had attracted the attention of several people some
time previously by its peculiar and reiterated cry—and from never
having learned that hard lesson of “ holding its tongue,” it met with
its fate. Mr. Hayden also had a good specimen, killed some time
ago in the New Forest, from whence several specimens have been
obtained. Mr. Hart told me that one of the forest keepers, Toomer
by name, saw, not long ago, no less that five Scops Eared Owls, in
the Forest at the same time, being apparently two old and three
_ young birds of one family. One of these he killed, and Mr. Hart
has it now in his own collection. And on another occasion, he
_ writes, that the same keeper “ saw a ‘ Scops’ one wet day, in the
_ Forest, got quite close to it, and on returning to the place with his
gun could not find it. He said he could not be mistaken, it heing
_ only a few yards distant.”
This finishes the notices of the Raptores (in this and the
1T see in the Zoologist for April, 1877, mention is made of the capture of one
of these birds by some boys in the Barking Road, Poplar, in January last; but
_ they visit us very rarely.
126 On the Occurrence of some of the Rarer Species of Birds
surrounding districts), which I have been able to collect, either from
my own observation, or from other trustworthy sources. But in
conclusion I cannot help remarking what a great pity, and more
than pity, it is, that in this neighbourhood and doubtless in other
parts of England as well, so many valuable specimens of our rarer
birds should be lost, by being added to swell the black list, on the
keeper’s execution board,! which, if killed at all, in the common.
interests of ornithology ought in any case to be preserved. As an
1 As an instance of the indiscriminate havoc made in the present century
amongst the Raptores, I take the liberty of citing part of a note taken from
A. E. Knox’s ‘‘ Game Birds and Wild Fowl,” in which is given a list of vermin
destroyed on the celebrated Highland property of Glengary, between Whitsun-
day, 1837, and Whitsunday, 1540, previous to the purchase of the estate by
Lord Ward—a havoc which accounts in great measure for the scarcity of many
of our birds of prey, which must have formerly made that and siwilar places
their headquarters. The names given are local ones, which nevertheless are
clear enough for all purposes of identification.
Wihite-Tatled Baglep soph igey oy aptiry es ee
Golden Eagles . . Se deh le» cle Mie” | enue MLO
Osprey or Fishing Riglds SRR PRD ae er
Blue Hawks or Peregrine Falcons. - 98
Kites (commonly called Salmon-Tailed Gledes) . 275!
Marsh Harriers (or Yellow-Legged aan, LS ene
Goshawks .. SM hich oe wa PGS
Orange-Legged Holbous ore Helhe one lea le pee 7
HobbysHiawksyi's; ss 8 se) 0's Awl eo egca o)y a
Common Buzzards. . . . + © «© «© « « « 289
Rough-Legged Buzzards. . . . . « « « « 3871!
Honey Buzzards . oylan {*si1y) come Sh est SAN 3
Kestrels or Red Bike Shpcigic. Weigel chile uns) (Oe
Merlin Hawks . . 78
Ash- Coloured Hawks C Tinie ane Tailed ditto) 9
Hen Harriers or Ringtails . a sly at ie 2200
Jer Falcon (Toe-Feathered Hq ?). oot) niall 6
Horned Owls .. . 35
Common Fern Owls (ailest likely Geae Bikchw bbe 71
Golden Owls (Barn-Owl most probably). . . - 3
Besides which were 475 Kavens and 1431 Hooded or Carrion Crows, and 1055
of different kinds of four-footed vermin.
Doubtless with such keepers as these, the Grouse were kept down. But what
ornithologist would not have far preferred the b/ack list to the red one on his
estate.
It is interesting to observe in this list the entire absence of the Sparrow
Hawk so far North.
In the Neighbourhood of Salisbury. 127
instance of this custom I may say that not long ago a fine Roller
was found nailed up in this fashion, having been thus gibbeted,
inasmuch as it was looked upon, from its bright colours, as being
more or less of the Jay tribe. When this specimen was found the
breast feathers against the board had entirely rotted off, though the
back fortunately was just able to be preserved. Without doubt, in
this, and other ways, many a rare bird pays us a visit, which escapes
notice, or which, if noticed, and even killed, yet remains unrecorded.
For it must be remembered that not only very few people, as a rule,
take a practical interest in ornithology, but that it requires a very
practical knowledge indeed of birds themselves to be able to tell for
a certainty, on some hasty glimpse of a bird as it passes on the wing,
or flits from branch to branch, (or whose note perchance is heard,
without the bird itself being seen,) the exact nature of the supposed
straggler to our shores. But though at times the wish may be
father to the thought, and some occurrence may be recorded on
insufficient grounds; yet on the other hand without doubt, many is
the real occurrence that is seen without being noticed, and many
the rarity actually killed, without its falling into the hands of any
one interested in the matter. And I can only hope that this and
similar papers, which if they do nothing else, declare that there are
some who do take a true interest in the matter, may induce any who
come across bird-news to communicate it at once to some of those
who would heartily thank them for the intelligence.
Aecollections of the Bustard on Salisbury Plain.
YE-WITNESSES of the Bustard (in the days when it roamed,
wild and free, the noblest bird which frequented our grand
unbroken downs), are now so few in number, that every authentic
instance of its occurrence deserves to be recorded, and therefore I
128 Recollections of the Bustard on Salisbury Plain.
joyfully seize the opportunity offered of printing the following extracts
from letters by the Rev. W. Quekett, Rector of Warrington, in
Lancashire, which were addressed, in the first: place, to Lord Lilford,
and subsequently, with farther particulars, to my friend, Professor
Newton, who kindly sent them for my perusal. To these gentlemen,
as well as to the writer of the letters, I tender my thanks for the ready
permission they have given me to print the extracts below, which
I feel sure will be read with interest by Wiltshiremen. [Ep.]
‘*T was born in the year 1802, and I believe I was about nine or ten years of
age, when, during the Midsummer holidays, I went on a visit to my uncle, at
Great Bedwyn, in Wiltshire; I went under the care of the guard of the North
Devon coach to Salisbury, and a person who attended Salisbury market once a
month called for me next day at the inn, to take me in his waggonette to Bed-
wyn. Weleft about the middle of the day, and in a short time got on the Plain.
We were a long time there, and (the weather being hot) the driver said his horses
wanted some water, so he would drive down into a valley where there was a
well, which the shepherds used for the sheep; and he directed me to take a
walk to a particular spot pointed out in the distance, and to stay there until he
came. I was glad to get out of the carriage, and amused myself by gathering
some wild flowers. In wandering about I came to some rough sedgy ground,
and had scarcely approached it, when 1 was dreadfully frightened by the rising
of several large birds ; I counted (I think) seven, as they continued in sight for
some time. As soon as the driver joined me, I told him the story, and he said
they were certainly Bustards. The date of this occurrence must (J think) be
June or July, 1812. I am quite certain it was in the summer of a year previous
to 1815, because I was then spending the holidays at home when the news of
the battle of Waterloo arrived, and it was previous to that year that I went
into Wiltshire. It was also previous to 1814, because I was at home during the
summer holidays of that year, when Richard Caines, a midshipman of the
‘* Undaunted,” that conveyed Napoleon to Elba, came to us to spend some
time during the holidays. I have ridden across the Plain several times since,
on horseback, the first time in September, 1826, to visit my then Rector of a
Somersetshire living, Dr. Rogers, of Rainscombe House, near Oare. I used to get
on the Plain at Chitterne, and with a compass in my pocket, and a map in my
hat, found my way pretty well, saye once when I was obliged, on account of the
fog, to return to the high road. It was a long day’s ride, the starting point
being some few miles beyond Wincanton, Somerset—W.Q.”
There is such a hearty ring of good old-fashioned habits, in the
independent mode of locomotion mentioned above, and such a re-
freshing glimpse of the wildness and breadth of the uncultivated
Plain sixty-five years ago, that I make no apology for adding the
last extract from Mr. Quekett’s letter, though it does not bear on
the interview with the Bustards. [Ep.]
i ai
K:U-L. ES
Wiltshire Archwological and Hatural
History Society,
ADOPTED AT A SPECIAL GENERAL MEETING OF THE SOCIETY,
May 16th, 1877.
RULE 1.—This Society shall be called “ Zhe Wiltshire Archa@o- Name.
logical and Natural History Society.”
Its Jae shall be—
. To collect and publish information on Archeology and Object of
Natural History, more particularly in reference to the °°"
County of Wilts.
6, To form a Library and Museun, in furtherance of the
above purposes.
Rute 2—The Library, Collections, and other property of the Property at
Society, shall be deposited in the Society’s premises at Devizes: “"~
such premises, and other property, shall be vested in thirteen
Trustees, in trust, for the purposes of the Society ; and whenever
the number of the Trustees shall be reduced to five, the vacancies Trustees.
shall be filled up at the Anniversary General Meeting.
Rute 3.—No part of the property of the Society shall be Dene of
disposed of except with the consent of five-sixths of the Members
present at a Special General Meeting ; but this rule shall not
apply to duplicates, which may be disposed of under Rule 26.
RuLE 4.—The Society shall have a Patron and Vice-Presi- ae koe
dents, elected for life, and a President elected for three years, who Presidents.
shall all be ex officio members of the Committee.
RULE 5.—The Honorary Officers of the Society shall consist of Hon- Officers.
General and Local Secretaries, and General Curators, who shall
all be ex officio members of the Committee.
RULE 6.—The Committee, in addition to the Patron, President, Committee.
Vice-Presidents, and Honorary Officers, shall consist of twelve
Members of the Society (to be elected as mentioned in Rule rz),
six of whom shall go out annually by rotation, but may be re-
2
elected. No person shall be elected on the Committee until he
shall have been for six months a Member of the Society.
Treasurer and Rute 7.—A Treasurer and two Auditors shall be appointed
uditors. . .
: every year, as mentioned in Rule 11.
Wales Rute 8.—The Committee shall have power to appoint such
Salarics. . . . °
Financial or Assistant Secretary, or Secretaries, and one or more
Attendants, at such salaries as they may think desirable.
Provisional RuLE 9.—When any office shall become vacant, or any ap-
appointment
cLOficers, pointment shall be requisite, the Committee shall have power to
fill up the same, provisionally.
Anniversary RULE 10.—An Anniversary General Meeting of the Society
Meeting. shall be held, annually, at such time and place as the Committee
shall appoint, and at least a fortnight’s notice of such Meeting
shall be given to each Member.
Election of RULE 11.—At the Anniversary General Meeting, the Patron,
Officers. the President, and the Vice-Presidents, shall be elected, if
necessary. The Honorary Officers and the Committee shall
be elected, the Treasurer and Auditors appointed, the Report
of the Committee for the previous year received, Papers read,
and all other necessary business transacted.
see RULE 12.—The General Secretaries shall call a Special Ceneet
Meeting. Meeting of the Society upon receiving a requisition signed by
ten Members. A fortnight’s notice of such Special Meeting, and
its object, shall be given to each Member.
Meetings of RULE 13.—The General Secretaries shall call Meetings of the
ommiuttee,
Committee quarterly ; or more frequently, at their discretion.
OneGenl. Sec. RULE 14.—One, at least, of the General Secretaries shall
Mecano attend each Meeting, and shall keep a record of its proceedings.
Custody of | All correspondence and papers relating to the general business
papers.and of the Society, and all manuscripts for publication, shall be under
the charge of the General Secretaries ; correspondence connected
with the Library and Collections shall be in the hands of the
General Curators.
Spat RuLE 15.—The Chairman at all Meetings shall have a casting
€ vote, in addition to his vote as a Member.
Duties of Rute 16.—The affairs of the Society shall be under the control
Committcs: of, and be directed by the Committee (three of whom shall be a
quorum). The Committee shall have the management and appli-
3
cation of the funds of the Society, but it shall not be competent
for the Society, either at the Anniversary or any Special General
Meeting, or for the Committee, to make any dividend, gift,
division, or bonus, in money or otherwise, unto or between any
of the Members of the Society.
Rute 17.—Candidates for admission as Members of the Admission of
Society (Ladies or Gentlemen) shall be proposed at any Meeting Pees
of the Committee by two Members thereof, and the election shall
be determined at the same Meeting, by open voting. But should a
ballot be demanded by three Members of the Committee, such ballot
shall be held at the next Meeting, one black ball in six to exclude.
Rute 18.—Each Member shall pay Ten Shillings and Sixpence Subscriptions.
on admission to the Society ; and Ten Shillings and Sixpence as
an Annual Subscription, which shall become due from new Mem-
bers on their admission, and from others on the first of January
in each year, and shall be paid in advance. Donors of ‘Ten Donations.
Guineas or upwards, shall be Members for Life.
RuLE 19.—At any General Meeting of the Society, the Com- eect
mittee may recommend for election, as Honorary or Corresponding
Members, persons eminent for their literary or scientific acquire-
ments, and such persons may be elected by the majority of Mem-
bers present at such Meeting by a show of hands.
Rute 20.—The Treasurer shall receive and hold all moneys Putics of
belonging to the Society, and shall pay all accounts, passed by the
Committee, on cheques for the same being presented to him,
which cheques’ must be signed by one of the General Secretaries
specially appointed by the Committee for that purpose, and be
countersigned by the Financial Secretary.
RuLe 21.—The Financial Secretary shall receive all subscrip- Duties of
tions due to the Society, and pay the amount thereof to the seremry:
Treasurer. He shall keep a book of receipts and payments,
which he shall produce whenever the Committee shall require it;
the accounts shall be audited annually, and an abstract of them
shall be printed in the Society’s Magazine.
RULE 22.—No religious or political discussions shall bey fier: Gast de
mitted at Meetings of the Society; nor shall any topics of a
similar nature be admitted into the Society’s publications.
RULE 23.—Papers read at Meetings of the Society and other Publication of
communications, if considered by the Committee of sufficient ““?™
Deposit of
objects on
Loan.
Their subse-
quent with-
drawal.
Acceptance of
objects.
Disposal of
duplicates.
Objects not to
be lent, except
for scientific
examination.
Duties of Gen.
Curators.
Duties of
Curators of
Departments.
The Museum,
when open.
4
interest for publication, shall be printed (with the author’s con-
sent), in such manner as shall be determined by the Committee
to be the best for the purpose, for distribution, gratuitously or
otherwise, to the Members of the Society ; and for such price to
the public as may be determined by the Committee.
RULE 24.—Persons may deposit (temporarily), as a loan to the
Society, books, drawings, manuscripts, specimens, and other
objects, if considered to be of sufficient interest by the Com-
mittee. Such objects shall not be withdrawn, when deposited,
until the owner shall have given one of the General Curators
a fortnight’s notice in writing of his intention.
RULE 25.—The acceptance of all specimens, books, and other
objects, whether as gifts or merely on loan, shall rest with the
Committee.
RULE 26.—No duplicate of any kind shall be disposed of
except with the concurrence of the General Curators, of the
Curator of the Department to which the object belongs, and of
a majority of the Committee.
RULE 27.—No specimen, being the property of the Society,
shall be removed on loan ; but any such specimen may be sent
for scientific examination, with the unanimous concurrence of a
Committee-Meeting and the Curator of the Department to which
such specimen belongs.
RuLeE 28.—The general management of the Museum shall
rest solely with the General Curators.
RULE 29.—Curators of Departments shall be appointed by
the Committee, the arrangement of specimens shall be left in
their hands, subject only to the direction of the General Curators
as to the space to be allotted to the several Departments, the
position of the Cases, &c.
RULE 30.—The Museum shall be open daily throughout the
year (Sundays, Christmas Day, and Good Friday excepted) from
10 a.m. until 5 p.m. during the months of April, May, June, July,
August, and September, and from ro a.m. until 4 p.m. during the
other months of the year, as follows :—
a. To Members, free.
4. To Non-Members, on payment of 6d. each.
c. To the Public, free, after 12 o’clock (noon) on Thursdays,
Fridays, and Saturdays, all Bank Holidays, and such other
days as the General Curators shall determine.
5
The Committee shall have power to alter these days and hours power to close
‘at their discretion ; they may also close the Museum and Library Teer, =
for necessary cleaning or repairs, on giving sufficient notice.
RULE 31.—The General Curators shall receive all specimens, Acknowledg-
books, and other objects, presented, or lent, to the Society, and et
shall immediately acknowledge the receipt of all such objects.
They shall also forward letters of thanks or other acknowledgment
to the Donors, or Lenders, when the objects so presented, or lent,
‘shall have been accepted by the Committee.
RULE 32.—All specimens and other objects, presented, or lent, Duties of Gen.
to the Society, shall be in charge of the General Curators until ““*°*
they shall have handed the same to the Curator of the Depart-
ment to which such specimens or objects belong, together with
the name and address of the Donor, or Lender, (in writing), if
known to them, and any information likely to be of use for
future reference.
RuLeE 33.—A record of all specimens and other objects pre- Register of
sented to the Society shall be entered by the General Curators in eeeeatet
a Register to be kept for that purpose. The entry shall include
the names and addresses of Donors, the localities in which the
specimens or objects were found or obtained (if ascertainable),
and any information likely to be of use for future reference.
RULE 34.—The General Curators shall also enter, in a separate Register of
Register, particulars of all specimens and other objects lent to Sid on lean.
the Society, and when such specimens or objects are returned to
their owners, the General Curators shall make an entry to that
effect in the Register, mentioning how and when the same were
returned.
RULE 35.—The Registers, mentioned in Rules 33 and 34, Registers open to
shall be kept in the Library, and shall be open to the inspection tare
of Members of the Society, and Donors, or Owners, of speci-
mens or other objects; but the Registers shall not be removed
from the Society’s premises, nor any entry or alteration made
therein, except by the General Curators.
Rute 36.—A Librarian shall be appointed by the Committee. ates
The arrangement of the books, drawings, and manuscripts, shall
be left to the Librarian, but the General Curators shall decide
as to the position to be occupied by the book-cases and the
general arrangement of the room (Library) itself.
Duties of Gen,
Curators.
Catalogue of
Library.
Catalogue
open to
inspection.
Access to
Library.
Removal of
Books, &c.
Registers to be
produced at
Quarterly
Meetings.
By-laws.
Alteration of
Rules.
6
RULE 37.—All books, drawings, and manuscripts, presented to
the Society shall be in charge of the General Curators until they
shall have handed the same to the Librarian, who shall, before
placing the same in the Library, enter the title of the book,
drawing, or manuscript, and the name of the Donor in the
Catalogue. The Catalogue shall be kept upon the table in the
Library, and shall be open to inspection by Members of the
Society, and Donors, or Owners, of books, drawings, or manu-
scripts, but it must not be removed from the Library.
RuLE 38.—Members of the Society shall have access to the
Library, for the purpose of reference, on such days and during
such hours as the Museum is open, except when the use of the
room is required for Meetings.
RULE 39.—No book shall be removed from the Library without
the express sanction of the Committee, and then only for a
specified time. The Librarian shall keep a record of all Books
so removed, and shall apply for the return of the same when the
period sanctioned by the Committee has expired. Drawings and
MSS. shall not be removed from the Library except for. the
purposes of the Society, and then for a specified time, and then
only with such consent as is mentioned in Rule 3.
RuLE 40.—The Registers of specimens and other objects pre-
sented, or lent, to the Society, and the Catalogue of the Library
shall be produced and examined at each Quarterly Meeting of
the Committee, and the Chairman, if authorized by the Com-
mittee, shall sign the same.
RULE 41.—The Committee shall have power to draw up and
enforce By-Laws, which may be amended from time to time,
provided such By-Laws are not inconsistent with the Rules of the
Society.
Rute 42.—No change shall be made in the Rules of the
Society, except at an Anniversary or Special General Meeting, at
which twelve Members, at least, shall be present. A month’s
notice of the proposed change shall be given to the General
Secretaries, who shall communicate the same to each Member a
fortnight, at least, before the Meeting.
BY-LAWS
OF THE
Wiltshire Archwological and Aatural
History Society,
APPROVED AT A SPECIAL GENERAL. MEETING OF THE SOCIETY,
May 16th, 1877.
_ 1.—The Quarterly Meetings of the Committee shall be held on Guy
the first Wednesday in the months of January, April, July, and :
October. A Meeting shall be held to consider the Annual
Report, at a date to be decided at the July Quarterly Meeting.
2.—A short printed notice shall be sent to each member of aay rae! ae
the Society, mentioning the place at which it is proposed to hold
the next Anniversary General Meeting, and the probable arrange-
ments. Such notice shall be sent one month, at least, before the
Meeting is to take place.
3-—The General Secretaries shall issue a notice of each Gon secretaries
Meeting of the Committee one week, at least, before such Meeting t° el! Mectings
is to be held. The notice shall include an “ Agenda” paper. «. Aepterteges
Subjects which do not appear upon the “ Agenda” paper may be
discussed at a Meeting, but shall not be finally determined until
they shall have appeared upon the “ Agenda” paper of, and have
been again discussed at, a subsequent Meeting of the Committee.
Notice of each intended Motion must be sent (in writing) to
either of the General Secretaries three weeks, at least, before any
Meeting, or it cannot appear upon the “ Agenda”paper.
4.—No person shall be proposed, or recommended, for election Names of pro
as a Member of the Society unless his name and address, toge- Rys*4 Nev,
ther with the names of the intending proposer and seconder, shall 2PP¢#* °%
3 i “* Agenda” Paper,
have appeared on the “Agenda” paper for the Meeting at which
he is to be so proposed, or recommended.
5.—One of the General Secretaries shall be appointed by the Duties of
Committee to edit the Society’s publications, the management of 45
_ which shall be left in his hands.
Publication of
‘apers.
,
25 Copies gratis
to Authors.
Duties of
Financial
Secretary.
Arrears of
Subscriptions.
Payment of
Accounts.
Scope of the
Museum.
Scope of the
Library.
The accept-
ance of
objects.
Custody of the
Keys of Cases.
Repairs and
alterations of
premises.
Power to dis-
miss paid
Officers.
8
(eae ce
6.—No part of any Paper shall be given to the Printer, until
the zhole of the MS. of such paper shall be in the hands of the
Editor, and, should there be Illustrations to the Paper, these
must be in the hands of the Publisher before the printing of the
Paper can be commenced.
7.—The Author of any Paper which is published in the
Magazine shall be entitled to receive twenty-five copies of the
said Paper, gratis.
8.—The Financial Secretary shall collect, and give receipts for,
all subscriptions. He shall give notice to Members in arrear, and
the Society’s publications will not be forwarded to Members whose
subscriptions shall remain unpaid after such notice.
9.—All accounts ordered to be paid by the Committee shall be
countersigned by the General Secretary appointed to draw cheques
in payment of the same.
10.—The Museum shall be rendered, as far as possible, repre-
sentative of the Archzology, Geology, Zoology, and Botany of
Wiltshire, with such typical specimens from other localities as
may serve to illustrate the local collections. The Geological,
Zoological, and Botanical series shall be limited to sfecies found
in the British Islands.
11.—The Library shall be restricted, as far as possible, to works
upon Archeology, Geology, Zoology, and Botany, zz yeneral, and
to books which serve to illustrate those subjects.
12.—The General Curators, and the Curator of the Department
to which the object would belong, shall in all cases be consulted
by the Committee before any specimen offered to the Society is
accepted either as a gift or on loan.
13.—The General Curators shall have the custody of the Keys
of the Museum, Library, and the cases in the several Departments.
The Curators of Departments and the Librarian shall only hold
Keys of their own Departments.
14.—All necessary repairs and alterations to the premises and
fittings, during the intervals between the Quarterly Meetings, may
be ordered to be done at the joint discretion of the General
Secretaries and the General Curators, who shall report upon the
same at the next ensuing Quarterly Meeting.
15.—The Committee shall have power to suspend or dismiss
any paid Officer of the Society.
*s407tpn py { eee on
‘ELON WVITTIM *yoaqi00 punog pu sn 4q poyrpny
|
9 8 SLIF 9 8 SLIF
“6 OL CZF JO
Ayat00g oT} ysuIese douvreg JoN B SuTyeU “unoooy Surping
UMasn]Loy} UO JomMsvoty, 94} OF ENP O G FETF JO oouvpeq B St AOL, «
€ 8 I9L °°°°** #JUNODIe sIy} UO puLY UI soULleg ce
ol¢ 0 sent weer eee wee eces eoeeeers aunooae
<f28tQ Sse] pue splig,, jo soured w
0 61 SI terse eee ececessceeess* "979 TOISSIMUIO) ‘
OI ZI ¥&
T cccvttcs xe, 4jredorg pus puey iy
1 eecees ecves steeeee* gouvansuy 71
SI °° * Sxa0M Ze ‘Op ye souepus Vy ss
L ** 0731p 32 sasuodxe snoaurtjeosiyy “*
Uinesnyy 32 8801731, pus sinztuin T WS
0° &l 46————_ .
0 Z 08 %'°' GF ‘ON JO JUNODIe UO O71
yO. FL” (8 ON. op = oN
8 F OC * L-OF ON auizesey_ roy
“o29 ‘Zutavisue ‘sunuid 0331q¢
6 OLF ois; assis 8 sisi") 59 Surpurqyoog ‘syoog oid
OT L191 ° ** ***** Arou0yeyg pus Suyurg oid *
8 6 g umasnyy 21} 0} UOISsTUIpPY Toy paataoer 0771qq ‘
it
I 6G ‘°°’ °° SauizedeyT Jo ayeg oy paateoar 0741 Le
0 6LI °° reek oy} Sump siequiayy Woy peated
0 Lt FI ttre sess- ow Surstyraapy Sosetiep -o1 suoTydiIosqng pue seaq s0uvIQUy ‘qsvg ‘ “48T¢ “09q
‘a8ejsog Surpnpout ‘syuamAed Arpuns ‘yseQ Aq “4818 ‘00 ZZ GZ “TTT * FUMoooe ysep Woy yYySno1q sourjeg OF, “3ST “ure
'P ‘Ss F ‘SINANASUN ASIA “9181 Bs F ‘SLdUIGOaa “9181
“ao “ad
SE ae Oe Sto 1) i, Ee a ee eee
‘gaisnjour sfep qI0q
" fg) QT ‘eqmesog 481g oy} 0} ‘Arunuer 4ST oY} Mosz ‘AyoL00g oq} Jo SJMoMESINGsIq] PUB sydtesaxy oT} 30 pourysqy
™," ‘ALAIOOS AUOLSIH TVANLVYN ANV TVOIDOIOWHOUV AUIHSLTIIM
FUND FOR THE PURCHASE OF STUFFED BIRDS AND GLASS CASE FOR MUSEUM,
SUBSCRIPTION LIST,
£s. da. one Os € 8 d.
H. A. Merewether, Q.C, PES |, je fee | Brought Forward 87 1 4 Brought Forward 106 12 4
The Marquis of Lansdowne 10 0 0 | Mrs. Salmon _ Rin 2 2 0 | J. Brown vee soe 10 0
G. Goldney, M.P. ibg 10 0 0| Mrs, Colston"... A 2 0 0 | A.M, Clarke ne 10 0
The Right Hon. BE. P, Bouverie,... 6 0 0 | H, Cunnington a veh 2 0 0} R. Clark eee cease 100
Sir. T, Bateson, Bart., MP. 56 0 O| R. Holford awoke ae ea 2 0 0 | F.A. 8. Locke aid 100
Miss Ewart .... He 5 0 0 | Rey, H. Olivier sted 2 0 0| W.C, Merriman .,... = oe 100
G. P. Fuller mids hems 5 0 0O | The Ven, Archdeacon Buchanan 1 1 0| H. D, Olivier, R. E. atop 100
G. Morrison ,... aa 56 0 0 | W. Brown eat es 1 1 0 | J.S, Gwillim fees ae °010 6
Sir. John Neeld, Bart. ane 5 0 0 | J. Jackson sivas 1 2 0: | (Ho. Kitne |... pain 010 6
C. P. Phipps .... ioe 6 0 0] H. EB. Medlicott ..., nse 1 1 0/| C. Taylor ACS mate 010 6
The Dean of Salisbury saat 6 0 0/|] OC, N.May.... Wid le 1 1 0| H. Weaver .... tees 010 6
The Rey. Canon Jackson,... 8 8 0 | A. Mackay waists ae 1 1 0} R, Coward sac aitste 010 0
E. C. Lowndes CB cwes 38 3 0 . Rey. W. C. Plenderleath , . 1 1 0 | Rev. C. Soames Aen 010 0
W, Cunnington ene 8 0 0} Rev. T, A. Preston “id 1 1 © | J. R, Shopland aC area 010 0
W. Long weve .ee 2 2 0] Rev, T. FT, Ravenshaw,., 10
Carried Forward 87 1 4 Carried Forward 10612 4 Toran £116 4 4
ACCOUNT.
RECEIPTS, és. a. EXPENDITURE, £ s. d.
1876, Subscriptions as above ........eeeeeeeeeeeeeees L1G 4 4 WSPG Bide Bre San: peas askichivenas coe ue Cen eer eo Oi. O
Duplicate Coral, etc., Sold seseeccseeecccsccecs 8 8 6 Bion) Gagaivciin aivtnvcvtnisre sletealteis iia walnisibion’ cre cateny Ot wOmmO
ERGWCHEGRY ~ ciciaatater stares inieideialatraiacate Teale @utnante see 012 2
Messrs, Bull, Printing’ ...cc.00cccceucsecce cen 0 12550
Carriagenol Gasei.. cn cau pepe seine aek ge enna 118 6
Deficit charged to General account 0 610 Buckley, taitig ota: os cee cpaepectie peceue 411 0
£119 18 8 £119 18 8
MUSEUM BUILDING ACCOUNT.
Museum, Devizes,
September 26th, 1877.
Dear Sir,
It is the desire of the Committee to close the above account
at the end of the present year; but before doing so, it is their
earnest wish to wipe off (if possible) the debt of £181 2s. which
they now owe on that account, and which will otherwise fall on the
General Funds of the Society, exhausting the Society’s whole capital,
and very considerably hampering its action.
The Committee acknowledge the generous help they have already
received from the County, but they venture to make this further
appeal to the liberality of those who have not yet contributed, or
who are willing to add a further donation to their former sub-
scriptions ; convinced as they are that an effort now made, if res-
ponded to as they confidently expect, will put them on their former
footing, by clearing away the debt on the Museum Building Fund.
We append a list of subscriptions for this object hitherto received ;
and propose to publish a complete list, after the account is closed on
December 31st, 1877.
We are, Your obedient Servants,
A. C. SMITH, Yatesbury Rectory, Calne. Gcumas
C. H. TALBOT, Lacock Abbey, Chippenham. 8 hiro
E. T. STEVENS, 19, Minster Street, Salisbury, ) °° CO":
H. A. OLIVIER, Poulshot Rectory, Devizes. General
H. CUNNINGTON, Devizes. Curators.
(Contributions. may be sent to the Rev. A. C. Smith, the Rev. H. A.
Olivier, or Mr. I. Cunnington.)
SUBSORIPTION. LIST.
Si.) shee @. 68.) a.
Ailesbury, The Marquisof 50 0 0 Brought Forward £68 1 0
Alexander,G. . . 10 0 0 Awdry, West . . 11 9
Anstie, T. B. 3 Syste WOuRO :
Awdry, Rev. E. C. ut Te OO Baron, Rev. J. . 5 4 OF TORS G
Awdry,H.G. . 29 it Oy 1,0 Barrey, H. G. a tac
Awdry, J. W. 1 aut 0 Futewog. Sir T.,Bart.m.p.25 0 0
Carried Forward £68 1 ie 6 Carried Forward £95 13 6
£ s. d.
Brought Forward £95 13 6
Bleeck, C. : A SOO
Bouverie, Rt. Hon. E.P. 25 0 0
Brewin, R. 0 A220
Brine, J. E. ° pale cloeD
Britton, Mrs. 2 #755 400
Brown, G. : ioe be 4(9)
Brown, H. ; ep
Butcher, W. H. . Seay)
Calley, Major . aed yal O
Chamberlaine, Rey. W.H.1 1 0
Cholmeley, Rey. C. H. 010 6
Clark, Major ° wero, 10°70
Clarke, H.M,. . eee 20) 90:
Clark, R. . eke a0
Clarke,W. A. . on) ae. 2. £0
Colston, Mrs. ja OA 8 fi)
Colwell, J. c ot lilies
Conolly, C. J. F. Sr ede 2
Coward, R. ; gig the a
Cornthwaite, Rev. F. . 1 0 0
Crowdy, Rev. A. ct al be I,
ditto (second sub.) 1-0 0
Cunnington, W. 0. 0) 40
ditto (second sub.) . 10 0 0
Day, W. . - a AS 70
Dixon, S. B. - So ee)
Dodd, S. : pe rh
Dowding, Rey. W. . 010 6
Edgell, Rev. E.B. . 2 2 0
Estcourt, The Rt. Hon.
T. H.8. Sotheron . 50 0 O
Everett, Rey. E. See Go
Eyre, G. B. . oft eee.
Fitzmaurice, Lord E, . 10 0 0
Flower, T. B. é eon O10
Fowle, Miss ~ ee)
Fuller, J. B. * . 25-0 0
Fuller, G, P. : 7) 0, “OKO
Goddard, A.L.,u.p.. 5 0 03
Goddard, H. N. 1 5 2700
Carried Forward £342 6 0
£
Brought Forward £342
Goddard, Rey. F. , art
Goldney, F. H. . - Oo
Griffith, C. Darby ee
Grove, Miss Chafyn . 20
Gwatkin, J. R, ae IS
Halcombe, John Hp heer:
Hall, Capt. Marshall . 2
Hamilton, Dean )
ditto (second sub.) . 5
Hayward, W. P. . 10
Heneage,G.H. W. . 10
ditto (second sub, . 5
Heytesbury, Lord « 10
Holford, R.S. . - 410
Hony, Rev. C. W. <p
Hughes, Rey. J. H. . 1
Hussey, J. . - 3S
Jackson, Key. Canon . 20
ditto (second sub.) . 20
Jackson, J. ° 7 2
Kemm, W.C. . Mat 5.
Kemm, T. . sive
Kenrick, Mrs. . Sy
Knight, Rev. J. . Sides |
Lansdowne,theMarquis of 50
ditto (second sub.) . 10
Leach, R. Y. = st Oe
Littlewood, Rev.S. . 1
Long, W. (Wrington). 5
Lowndes, E. C. ee
Lucas, C. R. s bra:
Lyall, J. . . 20
Mannings,G. . ae?)
MeNiven, Rey. C. ye ul
Medlicott, H. E. ye
Meek, A. : . 20)
Meek, A. G. 5 : ee
Merewether, H. A., a.c. 10
Merriman, W. C. oe
Merriman, E. : sl
Meyrick, Rey. E. opel
Mullings, R. : ; 40
Carried Forward £701 13
oo orcococococoeooow~oonoon#
cocorPOoOONONOCDND oooocorooo oo oo o
eccoooocooooo cososoeosesooo aeo0oo SSo9 cooocooecoooscooooSoSoO®
i)
£
Brought Forward £701 1
Neeld, Sir John . . 60
Nightingale, J. E. anit 2
Nott, W. . - -
2
Parfitt, Right Rev. Dr. 3
Parry, J... . Ce gy oh
Peace, Rev. P. . aol
Peacock, Rev. E. eb
Penruddocke,C.H. . 20
Phipps,C.P. . 10
_ Plenderleath, Rev. W. ‘o. 1
Powell, Walter, m.Pp. . 5
Poynder, T. H. A. . 50
Poynder, W. H. . 7d
Preston, Rev. T. A. . 2
Price, R. E, “ Till
Prior, Dr. R.C. A. . 10
ditto (second sub.) . 20
Ravenhill, W. W. aoe 7D,
Ravenshaw, Rev. T: F. T. 5
Rutter, J. F. 7 eae |
Scrope, G. Poulett . 460
Seymour, A. - 10
Sladen, Rev. E. H. M. 2
Smith, Rey. A. . A ee
Carried Forward £1032 17 0
="
oncoronwnooconoooroooorRW NOS WS
cooocooocoocoooooosooosooo eoo oN
£ 5.
Brought Forward £1032 17
Smith, Rev. A. C. s 5 0
Spine, Major . - 50 0
Stanton, Ven.Archdeacon10 0
Stancomb, J. ; » 2 0
Stancomb, W. . . 10 0
Soames, Rey. C. . ow
Talbot, C.H. . ft, wie
ditto (second sub.) 2 0
Taylor, C. . Bier al aa!
Taylor, S. W. 25 0
Thurnam, Dr. . 10 0
Waylen, RR. F. Page ea |
Wayte, Rev. W.. 5 0
ditto (second sub.) . 2 2
Weaver, H. - 5 5
Weller, Mrs. Wary ai, On O
Wellesley, Lady Charles 10 0
Whinfield, Rev. E. T. 5 0
Wilkinson, Rey. M.p.p. 1 O
Wilkinson, Rey. J. . 1 1
Wilson, J. 2 2
Wyatt, Sir M. Viral 5 6
Wyatt, T.H. . oe, Gl
Wyld, Rev. W.T. . 2 2
£1202 18
colooooooooooooo.lcoco co oO Se ae st
Since the above appeal was circulated last month, the following additional
Subscriptions have been received :—
£ s. d,
Bennett, J.J..u.p. . 2 0 0
Bull, H. F. : 2 2 0
Crowdy, Rev. A. (3ra
sub.) . sk 5 OO
Ewart, Miss M. . 5.0 (0
Goddard, A. L., M.P. (2nd
sub.) - 5&5 0.0
Heard, Rey. T. 5. . ae ec a
Holford,R. 8S. . 5 0 0
Hony, Rey. C, W. (2nd
sub.) 3.0 0
Jackson, Rev. Canon (3rd
sub.) . »- 56 0 0
Carried Forward £30 4 0
z
Brought Forward £30
Long, W. (2ndsub.) . 6
Lubbock, Sir J..m.p. . 10
Mackay, Alexander . 56
McNiven, Rey. C. (2nd
sub.) <. oe
Olivier, Rev. H. re ee
Smith, Rev.A. (2ndsub.) 2
Smith, Rev. A. C. (2nd
sub.) . 2
Soames, Rey.C.(2nd milk yee
coon?”
ocoooos
£60 6 0
a
WILTSHIRE ARCHAOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY.
MUSEUM BUILDING FUND ACCOUNT, vo 38lsr DECEMBER, 1876.
Dr.
1876, Br 265 ds 1876,
Dec. 31st. To cash receipts for subscriptions, as Dec, 31st.
per list ........ seeeee eteee ee OR ao.
To balance due to Bankers .......- 12h Oo
”
es
£1384 0 0
ee
», Interest thereon ,...
By purchase money ......0+ eeeeee
Law eXpenses ,...0-4- eocvceee
R. B. Mullings, builder ........
Salmon, stone-mason ,.,...+....
Randell
er a ween r eens
W. Rendell, ironwork, gas-
fittings, &c. ..... Tia alalste's sisis/a
Cash paid for paint ,.......-+-.
W.Crudge, painter ....e.ecsece
J. Burt, ironwork ......essse0
Mr, Weaver, architect .
Expenses of getting in subscrip-
tions
veers eeseroeres ceeeee
Cr,
ae Sin
620 0 0
410 2
50 19 0
840 6 5
84 15 8
16. eez
1146 0 0
2 2 38
112 13 4
Qe 0280
82 8 0
2 2-0
£1384 0 0
— ee
WILTSHIRE
Archentagieal aud Batucal Astary
MAGAZINE,
No. L. OCTOBER, 1877. Voi, SVE:
Contents.
PAGE,
Tur Ancrent Roor PAINTING IN SALIsBpuRY CATHEDRAL: By the
Rey. Succentor Armfield, M.A., F.S.A.. 129
On THE ORIGINAL PosITION on THE Brow ‘Anrea: AT : SALIBORE
CaTHEDRAL: By the Rey, Canon W. H. Jones, M.A., F.S.A., Vicar
Sof Bradford-on-AVOn oc<..c cocccccectatirens selscss cecceses 136
STONEHENGE: THE Perrotoay or its Stones: By Nevil Story
Maskelyne, M.A., FLR.S. co. eee ee eee eee eet e ee pete ee eee eee 147
Tue BisHoPs oF Oup Sanvit, A.D. 1075—1225: By the Rey. Canon
W. H. Jones, M.A., F.S.A., Vicar of Bradford-on-Avon ........ 161
‘THe WILTSHIRE ReGrMent FoR WILTSHIRE:” By W. W.
Ravenhill, Esq., M.A. Honorary Secretary of the Wiltshire Society
(founded A.D. 1817), Recorder of Andover, &e. 22+. seee--+ +e 192
Memorrs oF THE Rey. JonN WILKINSON AND GEoRGE MArTcHaM,
Ese. : By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson, F.5.A. Susie Metayals 234
Downton AND BritForD CuurcHEs: By C. H. Talbot, Esq. ...... 238
SupposED STONE-CIRCLE NEAR AsBurRY: By the Rey. A.C. Smith .. 253
ILLUSTRATIONS.
Ground-plan of Salisbury Cathedral ......+..ss+00-. 138
Elevation at ¢ on plan SR scot ce Se pO One OF 141
Microscope Sections in illustration of “the Petrology of
the Stones at Stonehenge..... ....eeee seeeee cece 160
Saxon Arch, Britford Church, Wilts ...........+.-- 248
DEVIZES:
H. F. & E. BULL, 4, Satnt Joun STREET.
i ‘wonky 74;
‘ oe Ki Toa t) eel
, an seer mt) z
13 ieee
t othe tee
*
HE ‘5 f errr Ei ; bebe 4 ite! ve es de eo
OE OG Nailt<p. WP EO A yc lowred (sb 36 seyeey eee han
Che. Diresreiret tn nicl ee Hf At wali Od aa oy rs j
7
ee era F 2 TS
EDS UB YN IME RS, fle ARGO OT yin) vi nA
Gy ie ea rhon-cibksadt raya yod
ha. ; ’
,
WILTSHIRE MAGAZINE
‘(MULTORUM MANIBUS GRANDE LEVATUR ONUS.”—Ovid,
Aucient Roof Painting in Salisbury Cathedval.
By the Rey. Succentor ARMFIELD, M.A,, F.S.A.
=GHE paintings upon which I now write are but a portion—
though no doubt the principal portion—of a vast system of
eolour-decoration which formerly adorned Salisbury Cathedral from
one end to the other. It is perhaps not generally observed that this
system of colour-decoration penetrated even to the exterior of the
Church, Both in the cartoons of the cloister and the polychrome
_ of the western porch! there was what I imagine is comparatively
rare in the English climate—an example of outside colour.
The paintings under our notice now were done in medallions on
the divisions of the vaulting of the choir; and they divide them-
selves into two groups, the subjects of the larger medallions being
sacred, and those of the smaller ones secular. These pictures have
attracted the notice of Archxologists in former days. When I had
the privilege of speaking on this subject at Burlington House, the
learned Secretary of the Society of Antiquaries unearthed a minute
in our books of the last century, from which it appears that the society
paid a sum of money to Schneebelie, a well-known draughtsman of a
former period, for making them copies of the Salisbury pictures. It
does not appear, however, that the society ever got the pictures.
Some traces of this colour can still be made out in both spots. In the porch
they were much plainer before the recent ‘‘ restoration.” The principal door-
way is said to have been called the blue door.
VOL. XVII.—NO. L. K
130 The Ancient Roof Painting in Salisbury Cathedral.
Unhappily the paintings of the earlier date are now gone; and
are replaced by similar pictures of our own time. This substitution
of what is modern for what is medieval will excite some regret—and
at the first hearing, possibly some indignation—in the minds of
Fellows of a Society of Antiquaries.
It is, however, only fair to ourselves, to remember that the medi-
eval pictures were not destroyed by us; but by the men of the last
century. They covered them, as indeed they did the whole wall-
surface of Salisbury Cathedral, with a wash of a buff colour, which
obscured the pictures, without however, entirely effacing them. The
wash in question was in fact partially transparent; and long before
the scaffolding was erected for the present restoration I knew per-
fectly well what were the subjects of several of the pictures, by
having scrutinised them from the pavement of the choir. It was
this transparency in the buff-wash that enabled Messrs. Clayton &
Bell to make the tracings of some of them which are now before
the society. I venture to consider that these tracings have a value
which is altogether exceptional, and which, I imagine, is far in ad-
vance of what could have been expected to attach to them; because,
so far as my investigations have led me, they are the only surviving
record of the old roof-painting of one of the noblest of medieval
Cathedrals—the “ illustris et praeclara ecclesia Sarum.” I sincerely
hope that they may not be treated as mere architectural lumber, but
that they may be safely stored for the information of future genera-
tions, and that this society may preserve some memorandum of
having had under their notice so interesting a record in the history
of medieval art.
It ought to be said that Mr. Clayton expressed to me his idea of
presenting them to the Dean and Chapter of Salisbury, for their
careful custody.! ‘
It was hoped indeed that it might have been possible simply to
remove the eighteenth century wash, and thus expose the ancient
pictures as they originally were. It was found, however, that the
size, or whatever was the vehicle of the colour had perished, and
1 Query.—Has this been carried out?
By the Rev. Succentor Armfield, M.A., F.8.A. 131
that the pigments were really in the form of dust; so that the mere
action of the brush in gently removing the buff-wash would at the
same time have made a clean sweep of the pictures also, and thus
have obliterated them altogether.
It is on record in the proceedings of the Society of Antiquaries
of London, upon the occasion of a paper by the Dean of Westminster,
that Mr. George Richmond, R.A., not long ago described before the
society a most ingenious method by which he succeeded in fixing
the pulverised colours on King Richard’s tomb, at Westminster.
His plan was to throw upon the paintings an excessively gentle
spray of viscous fluid, leaving it to dry, and then to repeat the
operation many times, with a gradual increase, both in the density
of his fluid, and in the force with which he applied it. The issue of
his process was that his pulverised colours became permanently
fixed and could then be handled at his pleasure. It might perhaps
be thought that the exercise of a similar capacity might still have
saved the paintings at Salisbury. There is however this difference
between the two cases: that at Salisbury the colours could not be
reached without encountering the wash with which they were covered.
Whether it was possible to have surmounted even ¢his difficulty, I
must leave it to others to judge. Messrs. Clayton and Bell assure
me that it was not possible to do so; and they give as the reason of
their opinion, that, while the ancient pictures were in a state of dust,
the superimposed wash, being so much more recent, was excessively
tenacious.!
Some connoisseurs, however, are still disposed to think that, by
the skilled and tender use of an acid the lime-wash might be re-
moved, even under such unpromising conditions. There can indeed
be no doubt that the task would be one of extreme delicacy and
difficulty. But it is the part of genius to execute the seemingly
impossible. There are still some paintings of the early date left in
the medallions over the transepts; the hand of the “restorer” has
been arrested: and I feel sure it would be the decision of this and
of every other learned society, that every conceivable process should
———-— WY
1 See Price’s remarks on the pictures.
K2
‘
132 The Ancient Roof Painting in Salisbury Cathedral.
be attempted for their recovery before permission is given for their
destruction.!
The question of the date of these roof-pictures is one of some in-
terest. It was chiefly with a view to getting that question decided
by an assembly of learned men that I brought the subject before the
Society of Antiquaries of London, early in the present year (1876).
It is generally admitted that. medizval artists decorated with some
kind of purpose and method: that they decorated most highly those
parts of their building which they considered most important and
most sacred. Hence, if you knew for certain what their decoration
was, you knew at once a good deal about the kind of arrangement
they intended to give to their Church. But then there was always
the question whether this decoration was contemporaneous with the
building, or whether it was an after-thought that belonged to some
subsequent century. I hope that question may be considered to be
set at rest. The tracings were lying for some days in the library at
Burlington House, where they were examined and criticised by
several well-known experts in such matters, and at a considerable
meeting in the lecture-room there I asked for the expression of
learned opinion upon the point. All seemed to be agreed in saying
that the pictures belong to the latter part of the thirteenth century,
or shortly after the consecration of the Cathedral.
It is indeed to be regretted that the tracings are not more ample
than they are. But Mr. Bell assures me that it was impossible to
get more. You could get a broad idea of a picture, when the eye
took in a considerable area, from the pavement, but when you
mounted close to it on the scaffolding, you got, in some cases, only
a blurred mass, which was scarcely intelligible at all.?
1It is proper to say that the surviving paintings in the eastern transepts have
not been so summarily swept away by the hand of the mason and are still
waiting to be dealt with as science may suggest. This is perhaps due to the
attention which learned societies have given to the subject,
21Tt is this fact which accounts for there being no tracing of the Majesty,
Mr. Clayton states his impression that only a little of the vesica and aureole
were visible at all, and that these were so faint as to disappear altogether when
you mounted close to them.
By the Rev. Succentor Armfield, M.A., F.S.A. 133
The design of the roof may be easily understood.
At the point of central interest is placed a large figure of Our
Blessed Lord in a vesica. This is where the small transepts cross
the choir.
The three avenues formed by the choir and the two arms of the
transepts are so decorated as to lead up to this as a climax. These
spaces are filled with large medallions, which contain apostles,
prophets, psalmists, evangelists, angels, and (possibly) the elders
about the Lamb in the apocalypse.
There are two features to be noticed in this part of the decoration
(i.) the figures are exclusively sacred; (ii.) the decoration is ex-
ceedingly rich. No other part of the Church can be compared with
it. There are no blank spaces, but the entire surface is ablaze with
colour.
When we pass beyond the figure of Our Lord towards the Lady
Chapel, we get into quite a different atmosphere of decoration.
We have here twelve small medallions containing representations
of the twelve months of the year.
Two points are to be noticed here (i.) the scenes are entirely
secular; (ii.) the decoration is much poorer than it was before. Not
only are the medallions small, but the space is not nearly covered
with colour, as it was in the series of sacred pictures. The small
medallions are unaccompanied by anything else to fill up the space ;
and the effect is bald when compared with what we had in the other
system.
The tracings of the months are seven in number, and they are
assigned by Messrs. Clayton and Bell as follows :—
1. January. Man warms his toes.
2. February. A feast. Trestles and a stool.
8. March. A man digs.
4, April. A man sows.
5. June. A flower in hand.!
6. October. A man with crust of bread and cup of ale or cyder.
1 Mr, Waller questions if this is not May.
x
1384 The Ancient Roof Painting in* Salisbury Cathedral.
7. December. A man kills pigs with an axe, while a second figure
diverts their attention with grain.!
It is perhaps fairly open to question whether these tracings are
rightly assigned to the several months. They are so assigned by a
pencil mark at the corner, which is subsequent to the tracing.
The press which occurs in the restored October is not found in the
original tracing. Hence the cup may not contain cyder, but what
passed for ale at that period, before the introduction of hops.
One point of great moment in any series of months is to notice
with what month it begins. In England the series began with
March. The calendar which makes January the first month did
not come into use here till the last century. Spenser, in Faerie
Queen, (canto vii. on Mutabilitie) gives a description of the months,
very much like some of those which are painted at Salisbury. But
he puts March first. I need hardly observe that this explains the
“seventh,” “eighth,” “ ninth,’ and “tenth,” which are expressed
in September, October, November and December.
Continental people, on the contrary, did what we do now; they
put January first. Durandus for example (Rationale Div. Off., Bk.
8, Rubric 3) does so; and he was a French writer of the same date
as the foundation of Salisbury Cathedral.
Now assuming that the restored pictures are in the same order as
the old ones, the series began with January. And this points to
the conclusion that it was done under foreign influence. Viollet le
Duce finds the same indication in the architecture of the Cathedral.
Speaking of “le mode normand” he says “C’est celui que nous
retrouvons....a& Salisbury....en Angleterre. (Dictionnaire rais-
onné de |’ architecture francaise p. 360, vol. 2.) The French in-
fluence which undoubtedly prevailed at Old Sarum continued perhaps
to a later date than is commonly imagined. It will be obvious from
what has been said that in my opinion the principal altar of the
Cathedral did not originally stand where, in our restoration, Sir G.
Scott has placed it, viz., in a state of divorce from the rich and
1 Mr. Waller questions if this is not November.
By the Rev. Succentor Armfield, M.A., F.8.A. 135 ©
sacred decoration, and in immediate connexion with the scantier
colouring of the months. I should not indeed venture to hold any
opinion on such subjects in opposition to so eminent an architect as
Sir G. Scott, were it not that I had the support of other authorities
in ecclesiology, not less distinguished than himself. In his own
profession one of the leading authorities of the Continent, Viollet
le Duc has.described and given us a picture of what was the arrange-
ment of a non-monastic Cathedral in Northern France at the date
when Salisbury was built. (Dictionnaire Raisonné s. v: Choeur.)
That arrangement looks nothing like what Salisbury looks now, but
it fits precisely the ancient scheme of decoration which was left us
on the roof.
It would be too long to state here the collateral arguments from
the ritual of Sarum or from the analogy of Churches in Northern
France, by which our opinion is supported. But the claims of the
decoration seem to be paramount. In our restoration those claims
have been ignored, and the result is that we have an anomaly for
which I know of no precedent in medieval art—the principal altar
erected in one of the less decorated parts of the Church.‘
1Itis observed that the colours (specially the reds) employed in the recent
restoration are rapidly fading. It is now ascertained that the modern artist
has not employed the same lasting material which the ancient painter used.
It is further ascertained that the (so-called) arabesques of the spandrels were
not painted as they are now upon a white ground, but upon a rich red ground,
This would obviously make all the difference in the solemn effect of the Church.
136
On the Original Position of the High Altar
at Salishury Cathedral.
By the Rey. Canon W. H. Jonus, M.A., F.S.A.,
Vicar of Bradford-on-Avon,
T is now some two years ago since an interesting discussion
Ss @ was raised, in the first instance, by a letter printed in the
Salisbury Journal, as to what would be the proper position of the
altar in the Cathedral at Salisbury. The writer, the Rev. H. T.
Armfield, contended, on grounds to which allusion shall be made
presently, that it ought to be placed at the east end of the present
choir, and not as now at the east end of the presbytery ; denoting
by the latter term, the space enclosed by the three large bays im-
mediately west of the Lady Chapel.
On the other hand, Sir Gilbert Scott contended that the spot in
which it now stands was that on which it stood from the first. He
set forth his reasons in a pamphlet, which as far as it goes is con-
vincing enough. It is right to add, that when the subject was
brought before the Society of Antiquaries the opinions expressed
were decidedly in favor of his view.1_ And during the progress of
the works, if I am not misinformed, there were discovered at this
same spot what seemed likely enough to have been the foundations
of an altar.
But allowing all this, the question still remains—Was this after
all the original position of the high altar? No doubt it was moved
at an early period to its present place, but may it not at the first
have stood elsewhere? This question suggested itself to more than
one of those who were present at our last meeting, when we paid a
visit to the Cathedral. It led afterwards to a discussion on my own
* See their ‘* Proceedings,” for Jan. 27th, 1876, vol. vi. p. 476,
~
Original Position of the High Altar 137
part with one of our members who has special qualifications for
forming a judgment on the question, and the present paper, though
bearing my name as the writer, is put forth as the result of that
conference. It expresses the united ‘opinions of the Right Rev.
Bishop Clifford, a professional friend of my own parish, and myself,
as to the real solution of the question. We visited the Cathedral
together in January last and spent some hours there; Mr. Adye, the
architect above referred to, kindly making: the illustrative plans for
us which accompany this paper.
I will candidly admit that, as we stood at the eastern extremity
of the present choir, and glanced at the roof-paintings extending
westward to its entrance, which are themselves of the date of the
13th century, we felt that there was much to be learnt from them,
Not only are they all sacred subjects, but there is a marked gradation
in them, First, we have a number of medallions, each with a patri- ~
arch or psalmist or prophet or saint of olden time painted within
it, extending to the western arch of the lesser transept; and then,
in the square formed by the intersection of the choir and transept,
which is in four divisions, we have first of all the apostles in three
of them, whilst in the fourth and eastern one we have a majestic
figure of Our Blessed Lord enthroned in glory, surrounded by small
medallions of the four evangelists. As we gazed on this portion of
the vaulted roof, and observed how all these sacred subjects culmi-
nated in the figure of Our Lord, it seemed to us almost irresistibly
to point out the spot below, as that where the altar once stood, the
centre round which the worshippers gathered, and to proclaim :—
‘Non est in tota sanctior ede locus.”
On the other hand, when we looked further east-ward along what
is now the presbytery, the roof-paintings are all of a secular character,
emblems in fact of the various months of the year, and in execution,
as it appeared to us, inferior to those in the roof of the choir. We
were aware, from Sir Gilbert Secott’s pamphlet, of Mr. Beresford
Hope’s ingenious interpretation of the series as typifying the ever-
recurring services of prayer and praises that have been offered now
for so many centuries\within these hallowed walls. Still the fact
138 Original Position of the High Altar
remains, that they are simply secw/ar in their character ; and though
we admit that they may be emblems of religion in daily life, and
teach us that “ whether we eat or drink or whatever we do, we should
do all to the glory of God,” we cannot for a moment forget how
far higher is the teaching of the emblems in the choir, all of them
more or less bearing on the eternal praises offered by the “ Angels and
Archangels, and all the company of Heaven.” And against Mr.
Beresford Hope’s ingenious and mystical interpretation we were
willing to put the decided opinion of Mr. Parker, whose earnest
words on this subject will not soon be forgotten by those who heard
them, on the occasion of our visit to the Cathedral in August last.
Now we freely admit that the altar has been re-placed where it
stood when Leland saw it, on his visit to our Cathedral, c. 1540-42 ;
that is, “in the middle of the easternmost bay ; that is to say, half
a bay in front of the screen which parted off the Lady Chapel or
ambulatory.” } And more than this, we will admit that it had
stood there perhaps for two centuries previously. There are ex-
pressions in the consuetudinary of Sarum which cannot be satis-
factorily interpreted except on this supposition. Thus the Lenten
veil is directed to be suspended at certain times “zz the presbytery
between the choir and the altar” (in presbyterio inter chorum et
altare), and the winch and pulley remaining in the pier marked ¢ in
our ground-plan—in the portion of it, by the way, which is fourteenth
century work—shew that the altar must certainly have then stood
eastward of the line ¢c d. Still it is clear that the consuetudinary is
later than the erection of the inverted arches between the piers a c and
é d, and of the apparently contemporaneous masonry-work below, in
which are inserted the doors which it speaks of as the north and
south doors of the presbytery, marked e¢ fin the plan. Thus one
direction is, that “the procession should go through the north door
of the presbytery, and round the presbytery ” *—showing, not only
that the doors existed at that date, whatever it may have been, but,
1§ee Sir Gilbert Scott’s pamphlet on the ‘ Position of the High Altar” in
Salisbury Cathedral, p. 3.
2See the extracts given in Sir Gilbert Scott’s pamphlet, pp. 17, 18.
aoe VE
2470'S 9 SS WG SOW a
N~ N<« = INN cf Ns
aT SS \ \
\ SV ¢ \S
7 & a :
|
Ss falls
NS
NZ
; SSS ad BS
a Bee
IN NSS VEEN
‘ ° r-) es
Pa
IN
Ss e é ogo
a
ASK SHSV &
ee EE |
SS ISS SSS WN vt \5 \ SN ie
\ \S \ \
- a \g ‘ae a
ie \F "\ \
SSK \ SKF S _N N
YS « \S
‘ \
N N_
s = ASSN F
N
as it would also appear, that the space between the lines a 4 and c d
At Salisbury Cathedral. 139
was still reckoned as part of the presbytery.
So that after all the arguments of Sir Gilbert Scott simply prove
thus much :—that at the time of the compilation of the consuetudi-
nary from which he quotes—and which of course was modified as
occasion required under altered circumstances—the altar stood at
some spot to the east of the line marked in our plan e¢ d.
But still, we repeat, this question remains to be solved—Was this
the original position of the high altar? May it not have stood
elsewhere Jefore the date of the consuetudinary from which we have
just quoted? And if so, are there any evidences that at all confirm
the impression which the roof paintings undoubtedly produce, viz.,
that it once stood just below the figure of Our Blessed Lord, at the
intersection of the choir with the lesser transepts, at the point g in
our plan? For it could hardly have stood, consistently with this
theory, at any spot eastward of the line ¢ d in the annexed plan,
because then it would have stood in the portion of the Church
marked, if we may so speak, as less holy by the roof paintings that
adorn it.
We think we are able to answer these questions in the affirmative,
and venture to lay before our readers the result of our observations
during our visit to the Cathedral in January last :—
I. It may be observed, that not only does the figure of Our
Blessed Lord seem to mark out the portion of the Church below
it as especially the “ Sanctuary,” butthe ornamentation, as
seen in the capitals of the pillars ¢ and d, also culminates at this
point. The Purbeck marble shafts, which cluster round the main
pillars throughout the Cathedral, are uniformly moulded, but the
capitals of these Purbeck shafts, surrounding the pillars which support
the arch above which the figure of Our Blessed Lord is painted, are
not moulded but carved with foliage ; and, as far as our observation
went, they are the only ones so decorated throughout the building.
This fact may go for what it may be deemed worth ; but even apparent
trifles have their weight. Of course, we are quite aware that our
theory commits us to the admission that the portion eastward of the
line ¢ d originally formed no part of the choir, or presbytery, at all.
140 Original Position of the High Altar
And there is no doubt some difficulty in accounting for the use of
so large a space of the Church at the rear of the altar, and between
this and the Lady Chapel.
II. There are at the foot of the columns ¢ d—the capitals of
which are foliated—what appear to be the remains of two or three
stone steps. The same appearance presents itself on either side, thus in-
dicating that at some period or other two or three steps stretched across
the whole width of the presbytery ; in which case the floor of this
eastern portion must have been raised considerably at a period subse-
quent to the original construction of the building. The mark of the
original level, as pointed out by the Clerk of the Works, was plainly
visible in August, 1876, before the present floor was laid down, and
would appear to have been, as far as we could form an opinion, on
much the same level as the aisles outside the present choir. Our
judgment in this matter was confirmed by the Clerk of the Works
whom we had the pleasure of meeting on the occasion of our last
visit to the Cathedral, in January 1877.
Now it was pretty evident to us, that these stones, which are
still undisturbed, were not portions of the steps themselves, but of
the skirting which surmounted the steps, inasmuch as they have
mouldings which were clearly intended to be seen; and that this
skirting went round the raised floor in this eastern portion of the
presbytery. It was, and in some places still remains, above the
characteristic stone bench or basement which runs under and between ~
the pillars all round the Cathedral ; and, when complete, it must have
completely covered the bases of the Purbeck marble pillars. It
seems clear therefore that it was no part of the original design.
These steps and skirting are of the same material and workmanship
apparently as the cross walls, and inverted arches, which have been
inserted between the pillars.
It would seem likely therefore, that, at the same time when these
higher walls were erected, in place it may be of the lower wall or
grating which existed previously, and so shut out from the lesser tran-
septs what we believe to have been the original presbytery—(viz., the
space enclosed between the lines marked a ¢ and 6 @) ,—the whole of the
floor which lies eastward of the line ¢ d, and is now thrown into the
y
be
3
a
pe ee eee) ee ee eter
i hh
ue ;
:
“ye
CSA,
Lez
zi Con flan
2% Holbor,
oto the Oneer. 236,
¥
A a
ctenanébass. Proe.
At Salisbury Cathedral. 141
presbytery, was raised two or three steps. Before this time, the floor,
as at first laid down, was probably not raised at all, but was on a
level with the aisles. The floor thus raised covered the top of the
stone-bench, and entirely concealed it. An additional stone-skirting
was therefore put on the top of it, which completely hid the bases
of the marble columns. The exact height of this new pavement
may be ascertained, not only by observing the remains of these steps
(and our drawing will explain this point) but, as it seemed to us, by
examining the masonry at the foot of the doorway of what is called
the Audley Chantry. For the floor of this chantry was originally
either on a level with this pavement or only one step above it,
though at some subsequent time a further alteration took place, and
a step was added at its entrance.
It may further be noticed, that, as far as we were able to ascertain
the fact, there are no indications of the columns, which surround the
Cathedral east of the line ¢.d, having been pierced by cramps or
other appliances for supporting a grating between them, to separate
the space enclused,—(as of course a presbytery would have been sepa-
rated)—from the aisles. Neither are there any signs of iron-bars
having been inserted for a like purpose into the stone bench in this part
of the Cathedral, on which here as elsewhere the columns rest.
Around what is now, as it always has been, the choir, such marks are
distinelly traceable in the stone-bench. It is quite true that the
spaces between these columns east of the line ¢ d were once enclosed,
but the construction of the wall was certainly no part of the original
design, inasmuch as the bases and lower portion of the marble shafts
must have been imbedded in the masonry ; whereas the fact of their
having been finished off with care proves that at the first they were
exposed to view. Moreover the way in which this enclosing wall
was inserted proves that it was a subsequent addition. Price des-
eribes it as having been “a plain wall on the outside standing on a
deep plinth, while the inside was adorned with niches, &c.” And
this screen, if so it may be termed, in no part tailed into any other
portion of the stone work, but was simply built up against it; and
marks, showing the height and thickness of this screen, as we may
term it, can still be seen in the discoloration of some of the pillars,
142 Original Position of the High Altar
The several conclusions to which these investigations lead us
would seem to be as follows :—that, from the first, what is now the
choir was enclosed by a screen or grating ;—that there is no evidence
that what is now included in what we may call the presbytery, w7z.,
the space extending from the line ¢ d to the line m 1, was so enclosed,
as undoubtedly it would have been had it been the original pres-
bytery ;—that the floor of the space east of the line ¢ d was at the first
not raised at all, but was on a level with the aisles. And the result
at which we arrived was the conviction that this portion of the
Church was not originally considered a part of the presbytery at all;
the latter ending at the line marked ¢ d. Moreover we thought it
probable that this part of the Church, which was thus neither en-
closed nor raised, might have been used by the /aity; and, if so, the
comparatively secular subjects of the roof-paintings are easily to be
accounted for. The term comparatively secular is used advisedly, for
of course they are capable of the interpretation given of them by
Mr. Beresford Hope, and a similar series of subjects is to be seen in
a large circular arrangement of encaustic tiles in a small side chapel
at Chester Cathedral,! and also round an ancient font at Burnham
Deepdale, in Norfolk.? In this last instance the names of several
of the months indicated by the emblems are distinctly traceable in
the stone-work, though the font itself is much mutilated.
Our theory then, by which we account for what is undoubtedly a
difficulty at the first sight, is as follows. When the Cathedral was
built, the choir extended as we believe from the eastern arch of the
central tower to the line marked on our plan a 6. The space between
the lines a 4 and c d formed the presbytery, and was occupied by
the officiating clergy. The space east of the line ¢ d, as well as the
1The subjects of the tiles at Chester are as follows:—JaNnuUARY, a man
warming his hands ; Fesruary, drinking wine ; Marca, digging the ground ;
APRIL, sowing seed; May, hawking; Jun, plucking flowers ; JuLY, reaping ;
Aveust, threshing ; SEPTEMBER, gathering fruit; OcroBer, brewing; Novem-
BER, felling timber ; DECEMBER, killing the Christmas pig.
2 See Archwologia, Vol. x., p. 177. Dr. Sayers, in his ‘ Disquisitions,” pub-
lished in 1808, at p. 257, says that ‘similar figures are to be seen on some
circular stones in the pavement of the Holy Trinity, in Canterbury Cathedral,
and also in the porch of St. Margaret’s Church, York.”
At Salisbury Cathedral. 143
two minor transepts, were all assigned to the laity, and were ona -
level with the aisles. The spaces on the north and south, between
the arches, were either left open, or only enclosed by low railings or
sereens. The high altar, raised probably on three or more steps,
stood at the east end of this original presbytery ; at the point marked
in our plan g, and so immediately under the figure of Our Blessed
Lord in glory. Both of the aisles as well as all the space at the
back of the presbytery being thus appropriated to the use of the
laity, the arrangement must have heen very majestic; the whole
congregation, priests and people, being thus assembled “in circuitu
mense Domini.”
At all events this theory gives some significance
to those minor transepts, which form such a characteristic feature of
our Cathedral, and shews that they were constructed, not merely
with regard to beauty, but also to real utility.
As incidental though it may be slight corroborations of the
correctness of this view, it may be observed, that though the con-
suetudinary referred to was certainly compiled after the removal
of the altar to some point eastward of the line ¢ d—where, as
we know from the winch remaining, the Lenten veil hung—it still
speaks of the space to the west of it as part of the presbytery.
Moreover Leland’s words,—‘ the second transeptum standeth as a
lighte and division betwixt the quier and the presbytery,”—seem to
indicate that at all events what we believe to have been the original
presbytery was not then, as now, counted as part of the choir.
Leland of course saw the Cathedral before the choir stalls had been
lengthened eastward some 20 feet, as in subsequent alterations,
and when the Bishop’s throne stood without doubt at the point
marked in our plan 7—at the east end of the stalls on the south side,
< ‘Sir Gilbert Scott (p. 30) says on the authority of ‘some writer,” of whose
names he seems to he ignorant, that ‘‘ the choir was lengthened 20 feet towards
the Lady Chapel” in the time of Bishop Hume, about 1778-9. This arrange-
ment is however shewn in the ‘“ Icnographical plan” of the Cathedral (ec. 1733)
lithographed by Mr. Chambers, the Recorder of Salisbury. My own belief is,
that it was far more probably the work of Bishop Seth Ward, about the year
1670, as we know, from his biographer, Dr. Walter Pope, that ‘‘he made the
Bishop’s, Dean’s, and all the Prebendaries’ stalls new and magnificent.””—See
Cassan’s Lives of the Bishops of Salisbury, ii., 72.
144 Original Position of the High Altar
“ex parte Decani.” At that time the space between the lines a 3
and ¢ d—the original presbytery, as we contend—was neither in-
cluded in the choir nor presbytery, but stood “as a lighte and division
betwixt them.” This hardly looks like an original arrangement,
dating from the first construction of the building.
III. But assuming the correctness of this view the question arises
‘Why, and at what time, was this original arrangement altered?” Of
course we are here left in great part to conjecture. Still we know,
as an historical fact, that, within a century from the completion of
the Cathedral, serious settlements from various causes had taken
place and endangered the safety of the building. The tower and spire
which were not certainly contemplated by the first architect, and
the weight of which was always far too great for the piers on which
they are built to support, caused, when in progress, serious mischief,
Moreover we know from Harpsfield, who quotes Walsingham as his
authority, that the storms which did so much damage in September
1330, to the churches in Wiltshire, and still more the floods which
followed in February 1331, so injured the Cathedral, that measures
of precaution were absolutely necessary. And among the measures
taken by the architect for the purpose was the insertion of the in«
verted arches above, and the walling-up below, in the space between
the columns a ¢ and 4 d. This work it may be was that alluded
to as having been carried out in the time of Bishop Wyvill, when,
by letters patent of Edward III, in 1331, the authorities of the
Cathedral were permitted to make use of the materials of Old Sarum
for the “improvement of the new Church.” Another way of arresting
this threatened mischief was the insertion of the prop, which takes the
form of a horizontal screen running acress the northern and southern
arches which support the weight of the tower and spire. Of course
the effect of these works in the arches of the lesser transepts was
to shut off the altar from them, and so to render them useless for at
all events one of the purposes for which, as we believe, they were at
first intended. The beauty of the original arrangement was spoilt ;
still the sacrifice though great could not be avoided. The altar,
whilst standing in its original position, ceased to be in the “ centre
of the faithful.” Its significance in that spot was lost, as well as
At Salisbury Cathedral. 145
its convenience ; and we agree with Sir Gilbert Scott in saying that
it would have held “an impracticable position between the two doors”
of the presbytery, when that was enclosed with a high wall on the
north and south sides. It was therefore thought advisable to re-
move it to a spot, which, as we also admit, Sir Gilbert Scott has
shewn to be common in other Cathedrals. The space therefore
eastward of the line ¢ d was taken from the laity, and added to the
presbytery. The floor of what was henceforth to be the presbytery
was raised two or three steps above the original level as already
described, and the altar placed at the east end—at the spot where
Leland saw it (marked in our plan 4), and where it has now been
replaced. We cannot think that this arrangement equalled in beauty
the original plan, but still for evident reasons it was advisable to
make the change. For unless the arches between the points a c and
6d could be thrown open, the space immediately surrounding the
altar would be too contracted 3 and these arches could not be left
open without endangering the safety of the building.
It may be well to remark, that just as in the nave of the Church,
there are at intervals openings in the stone bench between the
pillars separating the nave from the aisles, in order to allow ingress
and egress to the people, so most probably in the original plan there
must have been similar openings in the stone bench which separated
the aisles from the portion of the Church at the back of the altar,
then occupied by the laity. These openings were probably at the
places marked 0 and y—the portions now occupied by the Audley
and Hungerford chantries.
To sum up our views in a few concluding words, we would say— (i)
that we believe the original position of the high altar to have been
at the point marked gy in our plan, immediately below the roof
painting of Our Blessed Lord in glory, and that it stood there from
A.D. 1258—when, on the completion of the bodyof the Cathedral,
it was “hallowed” in the time of Bishop Giles de Bridport—till
about 1330, when the dangers that threatened the stability of the
building rendered necessary the insertion of the inverted arches, and
of high partitions between the piers marked a ¢ and b d;—(ii) that
the original presbytery was the space enclosed between the lines a 3
VOL. XVII.—NO, L. . L
146° High Altar in Salisbury Cathedral.
and ¢ @, above which are the four compartments in the roof con-
taining the twelve apostles in ¢iree of them—as though illustrating
the text, “In the regeneration when the Son of Man shall sit in
the throne of His glory, ye also shall sit on twelve thrones, judging
the twelve tribes of Israel””—and the figure of Our Blessed Lord
in glory in the fourth and easternmost of them ;—(ii) that, at the
first, not only the lesser transepts and their aisles, but all the spaces
between the eastern end of the presbytery and the entrance to the
Lady Chapel were open and accessible to the laity, so that there was
nothing incongruous in the comparatively secular character of the
subjects of the roof-paintings above, inasmuch as to them they might
teach the lesson of doing all things, even the ordinary duties of life,
to the glory of God ;—(iv) that when, in consequence of the dangerous
state of the building it was deemed absolutely necessary to adopt
such plans as completely shut out the lesser transepts, and confined
the altar within so contracted a space as probably to prevent the full
carrying out of the ritual prescribed in the consuetudinary, then the
space extending eastward to the Lady Chapel was added to, we
may perhaps say substituted for, the original presbytery, and the
altar placed within a few feet of the east end of it—a spot where
it remained probably for some four hundred years, and at which it
has now been re-placed by the distinguished architect, to whose care
the restoration of our Cathedral has been so wisely and happily
confided.
W. H. Jonzs.
The Vicarage, Bradford-on-Avon,
June, 1877.
we
147
Stonehenge: the Petvology of its Stones.
By Nevit Story Masxetyng, M.A., F.R.S.
fHILE much ingenious speculation has been expended on the
purpose and the date of the men who reared Stonehenge,
speculation which is not likely ever to find a final resting-place, one
path at least has been left untrodden, the pursuit of which might
lead to our knowing something about the nature and extent of the
regions included within the enterprises of these ancient people; and
which would still be worth following up, even if the purpose of
Stonehenge is to continue enshrouded in pre-historic mists. This
pathway is that of an exhaustive petrological enquiry into the
localities from which it was possible for the different stones to have
been brought together previously to their being reared in their places
at Stonehenge. These stones indeed are capable of speaking in a
language that has no ambiguity if we know how to interpret it;
while in the profound silence of history they seem to offer a solitary
clue to the area of activity, and perhaps, by implication, to the
motives of action influencing the men who brought them to the
plain of Salisbury.
One of the reasons why this path has not been systematically
followed out has no doubt been that exact petrology is a very modern
science, and one that has been pursued by very few Englishmen ;
and, furthermore, if there had been a larger company of English
petrologists, it is unfortunately true that at this time there nowhere
exists the material to aid their investigation of such a problem, in the
form of an even approximately complete public collection of the rocks
of Great Britain: and the result of so singular a blank in our public
collections is to preclude the enquirer from instituting the com-
parisons that would be necessary in order to establish the identity
of the stones of Stonehenge with those of the different localities
L2
148 Stonehenge: the Petrology of its Stones.
from which it might be deemed likely or possible for them to have
been transported.
I shall therefore, on the present occasion, confine my enquiry to
the point referred to me a few weeks ago by Mr. Cunnington, that,
namely, of the proper designation of those of the Stonehenge stones
which are foreign to the locality: the other and more interesting
side of the problem, that, namely, which deals with the original site
of these stones, and is in fact the sequel to the former, I shall hope
yet to grapple with at another time, when I may have collected
more complete materials from which to draw a conclusion.
The present is not the first time that the question of the source
of these stones or their true petrological character has been raised.
The late Dean Conybeare, in a notice in the Gentleman’s Magazine,
in 1833, p 458, drew attention to the ancient tradition handed down
by Walter de Mapes and Geoffrey of Monmouth, according to which
the Stonehenge stones—presumably therefore only the small obeliskoid
ones—once stood at Cilara in Ireland (Kildare according to Giraldus) ,
and were known far and wide for their mystical virtues. This
Cr y Cawri, or circle of giants, was however carried off by the
Britons, the prize and trophy of a hard-won victory over the “ King
of the country,” and erected on Salisbury Plain. The guardian
monoliths of sarsen stone, were the legend true, would thus have
been raised to give grandeur to the place in which this sacred circle
was enshrined.
Dean Conybeare suggests this explanation, and attaches the more
importance to the old tale in that the mountains that rise from the
bog of Allen are, he says, composed of this very “mineral.” The
Dean however does not give any exact description either of the |
stones or of the rocks with which he compares them.
Such a description has, so far as I know, never yet been given of
these stones, although general opinions on their nature have been
hazarded by persons of some authority, such as the late Mr. Sowerby,
whose eye was an experienced one, and my late friend and colleague,
Professor Phillips, whose scientific knowledge and whose judgment
on such a point were perhaps the best in England during his
lifetime. And Professor Ramsay has expressed his opinion on the
By Nevil Story Maskelyne, M.A., PRS. 149
stones in the Memoirs of the Geological Survey of Great Britain ; *
considering them to resemble in feature rocks with which he was
familiar in the old geological formations of North Wales.
The different views of these geologists will be commented on
further on; but it became evident, at once, that if any fresh light
was to be thrown on the subject the first requisite for the investiga-
tion was authentic material collected on the spot.
I was indebted to Mr. Cunnington for the loan of several small
fragments from, or picked up close to, particular stones. One of these
was a granite, and, had it been an authentic specimen from any
part of Stonehenge or the immediate environs, it would have been
a most valuable clue to the history of its companion stones. Un-
fortunately it proved not to be so, although it bore the label “ No.
27 Hoare:” and it had to be set aside as a link in the chain of
evidence. An attempt at the verification of the other stones in this
collection which I took to Salisbury for this purpose, further proved
so uncertain, that, while retaining them for general comparison, f
found it indispénsible for the purposes of a scientific investigation
to study each stone carefully on the spot, and to detach from several
of them small fragments for microscopic investigation : a process that
was performed with care, a small splinter being struck off by hands
not entirely unskilled in the use of a hammer, generally from a part
of the stone where some ruthless despoiler had previously detached;
not the smallest bits of material that would serve a scientific ais
but large masses of the stone.
If one is compelled to deplore the act of the local farmer or wall-
builder, who, in any one of the past twenty centuries may in his
need have broken off and carried into some useful purpose the
venerable sarsen from Avebury or Stonehenge, or any of the smaller
and more portable stones of the latter monument, to him a stone
and nothing more; it is only with indignation and contempt that
one can speak of the person—certainly not to be called an archzolo-
gist—who, in a mere spirit of relic-hunting, or perhaps of wanton
1 Geology of parts of Wiltshire and Gloucestershire, 1858, pp. 42, 44.
150 Stoneheuge: the Petrology of its Stones.
caprice, can break off a fragment from one of these venerable monu-
ments of a world-forgotten society of men, and appropriate it to
himself, to serve no purpose whatsoever. I trust that any to whom
Stonehenge is an object of veneration, or of interest, will acquit the
author of this paper of having raised a hammer in such a spirit as
this against these silent witnesses of an unrecorded past. The little
flakes then separated from the Stonehenge blocks will be found to
have served to add something, I trust, to the more intelligent kind
of interest felt in Stonehenge: and these little fragments, with
sections from some of them worked for the microscope, will be placed
in the Museum of Salisbury for the use of any future petrologist
needing to refer to them, so as to render unnecessary any repetition
of even this mild iconoclasm.
The total weight of some twenty fragments removed by me for
microscopic investigation is under two ounces.
Now the stones of Stonehenge are of four kinds. Of two of
these I need say little. My colleague, Professor Preswitch, long
since attacked the problem of the sarsen stones; and though the
precise bed of tertiary sands which capped our chalk, and by con-
cretionary segregation grew into the sarsen stones, may not be the
Woolwich or Reading beds to which he’ attributed them, but are
with greater probability to be assigned, as Mr. Whitaker has?
assigned them, to the Bagshot sand; there can be no douht that
these masses of concretionary sand stones are in fact the relics of
beds of sand that once overlaid the chalk area of Wilts and in places
became consolidated into the compact quartzite of the sarsen. Then,
as the chalk became denuded and carved into its present valleys,
these sandstone masses became broken up and dropped into the
valleys where, in the form of the “Grey wethers,” they still
lie, though the needs of man are rapidly causing them to dis-
appear.
It is of these sarsen stones that the great monoliths of Stonehenge
'Quart. Journ. Geol. Soc. vol. x., pp. 123—130.
? Report, Journal Geol. Soc., vol. xviii., pp. 271—274 (1862.
) PP
By Nevil Story Maskelyne, M.A., P.R.S. 151
ave formed, and the ingenuity and exertion of power that collected
them from far and wide, on a single spot upon the plain, are hardly
more remarkable than the art which dressed and shaped their uncouth
forms into those squared and mortised megalithic masses, the material
of which is among the hardest known varieties of rock. Regarding
another of these four varieties of Stonehenge rock * Professor
Phillips was no doubt correct in his forecast. He asserted the so-
called altar-stone to be “a grey sandstone composed of quartz sand,
silvery mica, and some dark grains (possibly hornblende) ;” and he
added that “such a stone might be obtained from the Devonian or
gray Cambrian rocks—and in other situations.” In fact there are
layers in the old red sandstone that might furnish the counterpart
of the so-called altar-stone. My valued assistant at the British
Museum, Mr. Thomas Davies, to whose aid in this, as in other in-
vestigations where I have sought it, ] am in many ways greatly in-
debted, has cailed attention to the occurrence of just such a rock at
the top of the old red sandstone cropping out no further off than
Frome.
It may not perhaps be entirely irrelevant to remark that the
Scone stone in Westminster Abbey is composed of a very similar but
somewhat darker coloured rock. The opportunity was once offered
me by the Dean of Westminster, in company with Professor Ramsay,
of scrutinising that stone. ‘Tradition, for once probably correct,
traced its history back to Dunstaffnage, which most venerable of the
Royal castles stands just where a small patch of old red sandstone
shows itself; and no doubt the Dunstaffnage sandstone is the parent
rock of the “ Stone of Destiny.”
There remain to be considered the two rocks which compose the
whole that survives of the two kinds of smaller Stonehenge stones.
It is here that I shall have to differ in some points from those who
have gone before me. With regard to one of these, and that the
larger group, the terms greenstone and even syenite have been
1See Mr. William Long’s exhaustive monograph on ‘Stonehenge and its
Barrows,
152 Stonehenge: the Petrology of its Stones.
employed. The other group, consisting of four stones, has been
described under names which if somewhat less vague are not entirely
incorrect, namely, “hornstone and siliceous schist ” (Sowerby), or
also “compact felspar of Mac Culloch” (Phillips). The stones in
question are 33 in number. Sir R. Colt Hoare enumerated 31, all
of which ean be recognised, but the stone marked 6 in his enumera-
tion is now in two fragments, and a small outlying stone in a line
with the outermost sarsen circle belongs also to this elass. It lies
near that numbered 5 on his plan.
Of these stones the four numbered 9, 11, 17, and 19, belong to
the class named by the late Mr. Sowerby, siliceous schist (No. 9),
and hornstone with specks of felspar and pyrites (Nos. 11, 17 and
19). The remainder of the stones are those which have been termed
greenstone and syenite. Greenstone is a vague term which might
include diabase; but qualified by ‘the reference to syenite, it is in-
correct as a description of these Stonehenge stones. In fact Professor
Phillips and Mr. Sowerby appear to have mistaken the augite con-
tained in these so-called greenstones for hornblende. Such an error
however might most easily be fallen into at a time when it was far
less usual than now to have recourse to the aid of the microscope,
and of thin sections of the rocks cut for use with that instrument.
Modern petrology, by employing this method of investigation, and
by further scrutinising the inmost characters of a crystallised sub-
stance by polarised light, is able to pronounce, often with a precision
previously impossible, upon the true character of a mineral constituent
of a rock. Thus examined by the aid of the microscope, the Stone-
henge stones, of the so-called greenstone type, are seen for the most
part to consist of a mass of somewhat opaque white or greenish-
white felspar; commingled with which are broad crystals of a brown
and sometimes greenish augite. The felspar can be recognised as
one of the anorthie kinds; probably it is labradorite, but the con-
dition of the mineral renders it very difficult to settle this point,
even by analysis; for it is considerably decomposed. Internally it
is seen to be thickly clouded with a flocculent mineral of a grey or
greenish-gray, and sometimes distinct green colour : a mineral which
is readily recognised as chlorite or one of the varieties of mineral
By Nevil Story Maskelyne, u.A., PRS. 153
Spawn under the chlorite group. Sometimes this mineral is seen
in distinct triangular plates of a bright green colour; and erystalline
lamine of it are enclosed occasionally in the augite, sometimes even
in such a way as suggest a doubt whether the chlorite is not con-
temporaneous with the rock, and not, in every case at least, a product
of its decomposition. The augite presents less decomposition than
the felspar: the crystals are broad in proportion to their length, and
give a sort of micro-porphyritic character to the rock. Magnetite or
Ilmenite, it is difficult to decide which (probably the former), is an
occasional ingredient in minute crystals; and quartz is present,
though very unequally distributed in small granular, but, under the
microscope, recognisable crystals. Of ground-mass strictly speaking,
that is to say as distinct from the closely-packed crystals of felspar,
there is little to be recognised in most of the sections that I have
made, though in one or two it is more abundant. Where it can be
recognised it consists of crystalline felspathic grains, that seem less
decomposed than those forming the crystallised mass, and may
possibly belong toa different felspar. Occasionally augite is seen
mingled with these, or a mineral which appears to be augite as ex-
amined in polarised light, and it also occurs there in minute granular
crystals.
From this description it is clear that the igneous rock, to which
the obelisks of this class must be ascribed, can only be called a
diabase. But for its chloritic ingredient it might be termed a
dolerite. But whether the difference between a diabase and dolerite
be, as is more probable, simply one of longer exposure, and, as a
consequence, a more complete succumbing on the part of the diabase
to the disintegrating influences of metamorphic action; or, whether,
on the other hand, we are to recognise in them two similar rocks
which have taken the solid form under different conditions of pressure
and of thermal action; in either case the chlorite, and I may add,
a small amount of calcium carbonate, detected by acid definitely
place these Stonehenge obelisks in what is now recognised as
the diabase division of the old class of rocks that have been known
by the vague name of greenstone.
An analysis of a fragment from the stone No. 4 was made
154 Stonehenge: the Petrology of its Stones.
made by Dr. Prevost in my laboratory at Oxford, with the following
results :—
Silica ee ¥F 51.7
Alumina ... iss 12.1
Tron Oxide 24% aS 15.3
Magnesia ... sae 4.08
Lime nee a 10.
Potash aig ff 1.02
Soda +e ~ 2.8
Water fe eed 2.6
99.6
The iron was estimated as ferrie-oxide, but a portion of it was
probably present in the ferrous condition.
The following is a review of the particular characters of the
stones which belong to this diabase division : the numbers indicating
the different stones being those by which Sir R. Colt Hoare desig-
nated them in his plan and description of Stonehenge :—
Nos. 1 and 3 are diabase of average grain, the augite and the felspar being
very visible on the surface weathering out from the stone. They are quite
similar and might have been parts of a single block. Some hexagonal crystals
in No. 8, when examined by polarised light, present the characters of quartz.
No. 2 is the prostrate lintel, curved in form and presenting two worked de-
pressions for the reeeption uo doubt of protruberances on the upright stones
that supported it. The grain is coarser than that of fhe two former stones,
The augite is present in considerable quantity in the form of short broad
erystals of a greenish-brown colour. The augite sometimes contains crystalline
chlorite and it aids by the size of its crystals in giving the rock a porphyritic
character, which is also greatly due to the felspar crystals which are often
distinct. The latter are of a greenish hue in places where the felspar has sur-
vived decomposing influences; but in the greater part of its mass this mineral
has become metamorphosed into a fleshy white nearly opaque mass, retaining
only the form of the original crystal; and this mass is full of the flocculent
chlorite that has been described, and which is in fact crystalline though only
recognisable as such by high powers of the microscope. Magnetite (or
Ilmenite) is also present in small amount and a little quartz in small granular
crystals,
No. 4 The structure of this stone though porphyritic is more compact and
finer-grained than that of the last stone. ‘The felspar is, in some parts, less
decomposed than is the case in No, 2. The felspar of the stune No. 2 has
By Nevil Story Maskelyne, U.A., F.R.S. 155
externally a somewhat yellow aspect, that of No. 4 is whiter. The augite is
browner than in No. 2, generally finer in grain and in smaller amount as a
constituent of the ground mass than is the case in some others of these diabase
obelisks. The chlorite is sometimes seen in distinct triangular plates. The
presence of quartz in some parts of this stone as a constituent is a noteworthy
feature of it. The crystals are distinctly recognisable and are present in con-
siderable amount. In other parts the stone seems very free from this ingre-
dient.
No. 5 differs from the stone No. 2 for the most part in the somewbat greener
hue of the augitic constituent.
No. 6, two recumbent fragments, and No. 7 call for no special remark; they
resemble Nos. 2, 4, and 5.
In No. 8, the ilmenite (or magnetite ?) is somewhat prominent as a constituent.
And this is also true of No. 10, in which the felspar seems very white and
much decomposed ; the externally greenish hue of the stone being due to the
augite, and also no doubt to the chlorite. ¥
No. 12. This stone is rich in considerable crystals of augite to which it owes
its porphyritic character, the felspar being very prominent, but much decom-
posed. Crystals of quartz are very distinct in parts of the stone. The chlorite
is less abundant and of a gray colour. It is to be remarked that in none of
the diabese stones has mica been detected as an ingredient.
No. 13 resembles No. 4, and is coarser in grain than No. 12.
Nos. 14, 15, 16 and 18 call for no special observation ; they resemble 1 and 3.
No. 20 is conspicuous for a yellow tint, which inspection by a lens shews to be
due to a prominent ingredient mineral, which in its first aspect resembles
olivine. Examined in the microscope this is seen to be augite which in this
specimen of the rock is more varied in tint than in others, and somewhat
smaller in the size of its crystals. In other respects this stone closely resembles
that numbered 12, in which however the augite is browner. The felspar is
more plentiful but is decomposed, containing a large amount of the flocculent
gray chlorite which gives it a white aspect. Quartz is present only in very
minute grains. The chlorite is a not inconspicuous ingredient and more green
. than usual; while also the ilmenite or magnetite is somewhat more plentiful.
No. 21. This stone is distinguished from some of the other diabase-stones
before described by the augite crystals being less distinct than usual, being
smaller and more regularly mingled with felspar, with which it forms a ground-
mass, in which a few crystals of the mineral are seen with porphyritic promi-
nence. The felspar crystals too are more completely filled with flocculent
chloritic mineral and are nowhere so prominent as usual. In short the specimen
is one of a less porphyritic variety of the diabase. Quartz can be recognized
as in other cases, but is not plentiful.
Nos, 22 and 23, closely resemble No. 21. =
No. 24 is a small block much resembling No. 2, and externally presenting a
somewhat yellow hue in its felspar.
No. 25 also resembles No. 2, but the felspar is very opaque and white, and
much decomposed.
No. 26 is more .porphyritic than any of the stones last described and its
felspar crystals are very white and metamorphosed.
156 Stonehenge: the Petrology of its Stones.
The fine obelisk No, 27 with the huge sarsen stone imminent over it, and
ready to crush it,—as assuredly will happen at no very distant day if the sarsen
megalith be not replaced in its erect position—does not differ petrologically
from the other varieties of diabase at Stonehenge. ‘Ihe augite is perhaps a
little less decomposed than usual, but this is not the case with the felspar which
-ls very opaque and much metamorphosed. ‘The green pure chlorite seems a
rare ingredient, while the gray flocculent chloritic mineral is present in the
stone in the usual way. This stone is remarkable for its fine condition, the
smooth roundness of its surface, and for a large hollow groove down its whole
length either worked by art or ground out by some natural agency in its
original rock-site. The hard tough character of this column of diabase has
enabled it to resist the assaults of time, and even to a considerable degree the
hammers of the iconoclasts; and it is now, as it probably was when Stonehenge
was complete, the most remarkable of these smaller obeliskoid columns of
foreign stone. Its pillar-like form, and the rounded smoothness as well of the
convex surface as of the groove that runs down its side, may possibly have been
the result of a quasi columnar structure in the original rock. Its position,
on the other hand, at Stonehenge, may indicate that it had to perform the
function of a solid base and support to some tall tree-stem, lashed into the
groove, and used, it may be, to bear up an awning over the so-called altar~stone,
or to carry aloft some accustomed signal.
Of the four remaining stones of this class, Nos. 28, 29, 30, and 31, the for-
mer two are similar to each other, and in the coarse grain of their felspar in-
gredient resemble No. 2, while the remaining two are not remarkable for any
special peculiarity.
The four obeliskoid stones that remain to be described belong to
quite another class of rock: a class to which it is much more difficult
to assign a brief and descriptive petrological designation. To call
it a hornstone, a felsite, or felstone, is only imperfectly to describe a |
rock, which with the fluxion-structure of some igneous rocks com-
bines indubitable evidence of its not having been a direct product of -
igneous action. Its fundamental character is that of a very fine-
grained mixture of quartz, felspar, and a grey chloritic mineral, in
which fragments of rock are occasionally enclosed, while also, dis-
tributed in the ground mass, there lie fragmentary skeleton crystals
of felspar, which have almost entirely lost their original mineral
composition ; their outlines being filled in with the chloritic mineral
and often with the material of the ground mass itself. This quartzose
ground mass exhibits the quartz in rounded microscopic grains,
varying in their size, with which in variable proportions the felspathie
particles and chloritic grains are mingled in such a way that the
aspect of the rock is that of a triturated igneous rock, the materials
By Nevil Story Maskelyne, U..A., P.R.S. 157
of which have been re-distributed by aqueous action. Occasionally
the quartz is crystallised and not apparently rounded, and, also
occasionally, the chlorite mineral is seen to present itself in vermicu-
lar forms of the kind to which the term “ helminth” has been applied.
The minute crystalline structures termed microlites may in some cases
(especially in the stone No. 9) be detected, and a few hexagonal
prismatic nodules that are revealed in one or two microscopic sections,
may possibly be apatite. A dark opaque mineral which is present
to a small amount is probably pyrrhotine (magnetic pyrites), this
mineral being present as an important ingredient in the stone num-
bered 17.
- The so-termed fluxional character presented in the distribution of
the minerals in these stones, which is best seen in a section from
the stones numbered 11 and 17, and is also a conspicuous feature of
some of the stone chips and fragments Mr. Cunnington has collected
from the ground immediately surrounding Stonehenge, is a charac-
teristic structure to be borne in .mind in the search for their
source. It is a by no means uncommon feature of this class of
sedimentary rocks, built up of the disintegrated materials of older
igneous rocks. The ground mass is seen in bent and wavy lines
streaming round the little fragments of uncrushed rock or of felspar-
erystals that are scattered through the mass, the contortions being
often of sharp curvature and_ affecting all the neighbouring ground
mass.
Rocks from the silurian and Cambrian regions of North Wales
and Cumberland can easily be found which present this structure,
some of which, in the nature also of their material, resemble the
rocks under description. Such, for instance, is a rock from Pen-
maen, in Merionethshire, and certain of those from Cumberland and
North Wales, recently described as “ volcanic ash” by Mr. Clifton
Ward, resemble it in some points of structure. It is not however:
a volcanic ash nor indeed do the microscopic features of many of the
rocks so described appear to me to bear out this appellation. Some
of them are undoubtedly much altered porphyries, and of others it is
difficult to say at least from their characters as revealed by the.
microscrope in what they differ from a sedimentary rock resulting
158 Stonehenge: the Petrology. of its Stones.
from the breaking down and re-distribution of the pre-existing
igneous rocks.
The term schist as applied to the four Stonehenge “hornstones ”
by Mr. Sowerby, is not erroneous. They have a marked schistoid
structure, especially the stone 19, and this character is more obvious
in some of the fragments, probably of other stones that have dis-
appeared, found by Mr. Cunnington close by, and belonging to this
type.
These stones are harder than quartz. Their specific gravity varies
from about 2.7 to 2.8, a specimen of the stone number 9 having the
the specific gravity 2.783.
It will thus be seen that they belong to a variety of sedimentary
and somewhat metamorphosed rock which may be termed a quartzose
felsite.
An analysis of the stone No. 19, made by Dr. Prevost, gave the
following as its composition :—
Silica we ats 77.4
Alumina ... ise 13.5
Tron Oxide ib A 3.5
Magnesia ... att 1.3
Lime sie 333 1.8
Potash nt At 0.6
Soda a “ai 0.73
Water a “ts 1.3
100.13
The following more particular description of each of the four
stones will complete this notice :—
No. 9. The ground mass of this stone is rich in grey chloritic mineral; it in
fact might be looked on as having been originally a mud in which were mingled
the fine quartzose sand and triturated crystals of felspar (not improbably oligo-
clase) fractured or crushed by the forces that disintegrated the original rock from
which the material wasderived, and in the metamorphosis of which the chlorite
probably took itsorigin. The merely skeleton forms which often represent the fel-
spar, shew that the process of metamorphosis continued after the deposit and
previous to the solidifying of the materials of this chloritic paste; their shadowy
forms being often entirely filled with the flocculent chlorite material, resembling
By Nevil Story Maskelyne, M.A., F.R.S. 159
the rest of the ground-mass, and hardly atrace of the felspar then remaining un-
decomposed. Some of these fragmentary crystal outlines may belong to other
minerals, such as augite, but their forms are too much broken up for a decision
as to the original character of the minerals, and so far as to the rock or rocks
from which they may have been derived. The chlorite occurs sometimes in
distinct green crystalline aggregations.
No. 11. The stone presents a bluer aspect than the last described, due to its
containing more of the grey-green chlorite: the felspar is more abundant in
fragmentary crystals and it is less completely decomposed than the stone num-
bered 9. The waved and so-termed fluxional nature of the ground-mass which
has the appearance of having flowed round and past the less mobile fragments
of felspar crystals is very marked in this stone.
No. 17. The ground-mass of this stone is of fine grain and the fluxional
structure is very prevalent. The stone is remarkable for the large amount of
pyrrhotine (‘‘ magnetic pyrites”) it contains, to the decomposition of which
the brown stain that discolours it is due. The structure of the rock is evidently
schistose.
No. 19. Coarser in the grain of its ground-mass, this stone is less remarkable
for the fluxion-structure than No. 11 and No. 17. The Chlorite in it is more
frequently vermicular in character than in the other stones. In a section made
from it, is seen, associated with the felspathic fragmentary crystals, an angular
fragment of a decomposed fine-grained doleritic rock.
A description of the Stonehenge stones would be incomplete that
omitted to notice the large numbers of chips or fragments that Mr.
Cunnington has shewn may be found by searching beneath the
surface soil immediately round the great circle of stones, and more
especially on the south and west sides of it. Their lithological
features are generally identical with the stones that compose Stone-
henge, large numbers of them being fragments of the same kinds
of diabasic dolerite and felsitic rock that form the materials of the
smaller obelisks. Some of them on the other hand present somewhat
distinctive features: thus, in particular, there may be found among
them a compact variety of rock with a decided slaty cleavage and
character, a quartzose grit with thin scales of brown mica and
green grains of, apparently, chlorite. In one of them belonging
to the felsitic kind of rock composing the four obelisks, one of the
fragments of felspar-crystal exhibits the twin-striation of an anorthic
felspar, probably of oligoclase. An extension of the search thus
commenced by Mr. Cunnington would undoubtedly lead to a much
_ More complete acquaintance with the nature of the stones employed
_ at Stonehenge, and aid in a future solution of the problem of their
160 Stonehenge: the Petrology of its Stones.
sources. Whether the stones that thus strew the ground around
Stonehenge are as Mr. Cunnington supposes, the scattered chips
left by the artificers of the great monument after hewing and shaping
the obeliskoid stones out of ruder blocks, or whether they are the
fragmeuts left by despoilers who have broken up and shaped:into
building stones the obelisks, the places of which within the circle of
Stonehenge are now vacant or also other outer rows of them that
have vanished altogether, it may now be impossible to determine.
In the former case their position would seem to indicate that the
stones of this class were brought on to the ground from south or
south-west.
The original monastic buildings at Amesbury and the walls of
Old Sarum might have revealed something on the point suggested
—but they too have been in turn despoiled, ae razed, all but*
fragments of them.
The plate represents the appearance of the different rocks of which
Stonehenge is formed, when seen in a microscope with a low power
(a one-inch object glass). The section No. 1 is that of one of the
sarsen stones, No. 2 is the altar-stone, Nos. 3 and 4 are sections from
the diabasic dolerite of the stones No. 4 and No. 20 respectively.
In them A represents the Augite; F the felspar; X, chlorite; and
Q the distinct crystals of quartz. No. 4 is a section of a rock closely
resembling the diabase, from the Corstorphine Hills near Edinburgh ;
the only rock yet met with by me that resembles in its microscopic
characters this variety of the Stonehenge stones. No. 6 is a repre-
sentation of a section of the felstone No. 17. It-shews well the
fluxional structure of the rock, and is selected on account of its
including a formless fragment of another rock.
"
‘Altar’
2,Micaceous Grit.
Sarsen Stone.
1
20.Hoare.
NG
:
(or altered Dolerite
3 & 4, Diabase
6, Felstone.
, Corstorphine Hills.
_ §,Diabasic rock
T Hollick del etlith.
Mmtern Bros. imp.
MICROSCOPE SECTIONS IN ILLUSTRATION OF THE
PETROLOGY OF THE STONES AT STONEHENGE.
161
Che Bishops of Old Sarum,
@.B. 1075—1225.
By the Rev. Canon W. H. Jones, M.A., F.S.A.,
Vicar of Bradford-on-Avon.
WET may well seem strange, that a full and accurate account of
sk &) our Episcopate whilst the see was at Old Sarum has never
yet been written; for it must always form an important and interesting
chapter in the annals not only of Wiltshire but of our country at -
large.
The full period over which such an enquiry ranges is one of some
one hundred and fifty years, extending from A.D, 1075—when
Herman, Bishop of the sees of Ramsbury and Sherborne, removed
his dishop’s-stool to Old Sarum—to A.D. 1225, when a second
migration took place—a removal from the waterless hill-fortress of
Old Sarum to the plain or meadow of Merfield, the site of New
Sarum (or Salisbury), where the brothers Herbert and Richard
Poore, successively Bishops of Old Sarum, founded at once a Church
and a City.
During that period of a century and a half no less than seven
Bishops, including Herman himeelf, ruled over the diocese of Sarum.
We have seemed really to know so little about them, that their rule
at Old Sarum has presented itself to our minds simply as a brief
parenthesis in the story of our episcopate, the memory of which has
long faded away. And yet those one hundred and fifty years
witnessed changes both in Church and State, and especially in their
relations to each other, which were not only important but lasting,
It is enough to say that they included the primacy of the firm yet
saintly Anselm, and of the unbending and arrogant Becket, to in-
_ dicate the importance of an accurate investigation of the whole
_ story. For in the contests of those days, civil or ecclesiastical, most
_ of our early bishops took a leading part. Happily now by the
_ VOL. XVII.—NO. L. M
162 ' Bishops of Old Sarum.
publication of so many valuable records bearing upon the history
of these times in the Rolls Series, and by the throwing open to
literary enquirers in most places free access to public documents, and
to the labours of such men as Professor Stubbs, Mr. E. A. Freeman,
the Dean of St. Paul’s, and others, materials that may be relied on
are not wanting.
Early in the eighth century—in the year A.D. 705— the whole
of the south-western part of England was placed under the nominal
charge of one bishop, who had his see, or dishop’s-stool, at Sher-
borne. Such was the diocese committed to the care of St. Aldhelm.
Two hundred years afterwards—in the year 909—a sub-division was
made, and out of the original huge diocese of Sherborne were formed
‘four distinct sees, viz., those of Sherborne (henceforth meluding
only Dorset), Ramsbury, Wells, and Crediton. With ¢wo only of
these—Ramsbury and Sherborne—have we any concern.
Ramsbury is in the north-eastern part of Wiltshire, close by
Hungerford. Its original name was Hrefnesbyrig, one that would
be better Englished as “ Ravensbury” than in its corrupted and
misleading form “ Ramsbury.” Its bishops used to describe them-
selves “ Episeopi Corvinensis Ecclesiz,” showing that they at least
were aware of the true etymology. Their diocese included, speaking
generally, what is now understood by Wilts and Berks. In the year
1045, Herman, who was then a chaplain to Edward the Confessor,
was appointed to this bishopric. It was small in value, and he ruled
it single-handed ; for though he had, as is implied, a small Cathedral,
there was, as far as we know, no body of canons forming a chapter
annexed to it.! He made great efforts to get the see transferred
to Malmesbury and augmented by some of the revenues of that
rich foundation, and in truth all but succeeded, his wishes being
thwarted at the very last moment. Smarting under disappointment
he retired to the monastery of St. Bertin, in France, the adminis-
tration of his diocese being meanwhile committed to Ealdred, Bishop
of Worcester.
1 For the story of Herman, as Bishop of Ramsbury, see Freeman’s ‘‘ Norman
Conquest,” ii., 401, See also Praman s History of the “‘ Cathedral Church of
Wells,” p. 31.
Herman, 1075—1078. 163
In the year 1058 Herman was appointed to the see of Sherborne,
and was allowed to hold it together with his own see of Ramsbury.
Herman lived at Sherborne for some seventeen years, making that
place the see of the two dioceses, At the end of that time, in the
year 1675, in consequence of a decision arrived at by a council held at
St. Paul’s, London, in the time of Archbishop Lanfranc, at which
council Herman himself was present, the two sees became one united
bishopric, the see of which was fixed at Old Sarum—the diocese
comprising Wilts, Berks, and Dorset.
Old Sarum was indeed a strange place to choose for a bishop’s
see, an unpromising site on which to build a Cathedral. The chroni-
elers speak of it as “a fortress rather than a city, placed on a high
hill, surrounded by a massive wall.”! The settlement, so to speak,
comprised not only the king’s castle, with all his officers and retainers,
but the quarters of the bishop and his clergy. The relations of
Chureh and State are at all times matters of delicate adjustment ;
and hence it is not surprising to find, that when the authorities in
Church and State were brought into such necessary and close prox-
imity, not a few unfriendly conflicts took place. Peter de Blois
indeed speaks of the Church at Old Sarum as the “ Ark of God
shut up in the temple of Baal.”? Nevertheless on that unpromising
site, Herman, old as he was—he had already been a bishop more
than thirty years—began vigorously to build a Church, But he
lived only to lay its foundations, or little more,.for he died within
two years of the removal of his see to Old Sarum, leaving his
work to be carried on to completion by his successor, the famous
Osmund, a name renowned in liturgical history.
Herman was a Fleming by birth. He was one of the eight
eonsecrators of Lanfranc, a true member of the old English hierarchy,
the only one in truth of them who had received consecration from a
‘Vice civitatis castellum locatum in edito, muro vallatum non exiguo,”
Malms. Gest Pontif., 183.
* The description—I am quoting second-hand from Ledwych—given of Old
Sarum by Peter de Blois, in one of his poetical epistles, is as follows :—
‘Quid domini domus in castro? Nisi foederis Arca
In templo Baalim; carcer uterque locus,
Est inibi defectus aque, sed copia crete,
Sevit ibi ventus, sed Philomela silet.’’
164 Bishops of Old Sarum.
primate of English birth and undoubted canonical position.1 Twice,
at least, he was sent to Rome “on the king’s errand.” This
notice, slight as it appears, is important, for it marks the com-
mencement of that habit of constant reference to the papal see
which more than once led to important results in England. It was
not indeed until the reign of the Conqueror that that custom was, so
to speak, an established one. As one of our greatest living historians
has said— In making England part of the great Western Common-
wealth, of which Rome was still the head, William bent our necks
beneath the yoke of Rome, the yoke no longer of her Cxsar, but of
her Pontiff. That yoke, pressed upon us by the first Prince of Gaul
who won a footing in England, was thrown off by the last Prince of
England who won a footing in Gaul.” ?
Herman seems to have had in his diocese of Old Sarum the help
of a suffragan, who is described as Rothulf (or Ralph), a Norwegian
bishop, who was a kinsman of Edward the Confessor. At all
events, in 1050, the king bestowed the abbaey of Abingdon on
“ Bishop Rothulf, his kinsman.” * His predecessor as abbot, Siward
by name, had been consecrated as coadjutor to Archbishop Eadsige,
in 1044.
It is customary to speak of a plain coffin-fashioned tomb of Purbeck
marble, now lying near the west end of the Cathedral on the south
side, as that which once covered the remains of Bishop Herman,
and as having been brought with them from Old Sarum.* I do not
recollect. ever to have seen any record of Herman’s burial-place, and
I should have conjectured it was more likely to have been at Sher-
borne, where he lived for many years, than at Old Sarum. Certainly
William de Wanda, in his account of the translation of the bodies
of former bishops to the new Cathedral, in 1225, makes no mention
whatever of that of Bishop Herman.
1 Freeman’s ‘* Norman Conquest,” iv., 348.
2 Freeman’s ‘‘ Norman Conquest,” yv., 651.
3 He was Abbot of Abingdon, 1050—1052. Stubbs’ Reg. Sacr., p. 143. See
also History of Abingdon Mon. (Angl. Sacr.), i., 167.
* See Dodsworth’s Salisbury Cathedral, p. 188,
a
”
Osmund, 1078—1099. 165
Osmunp, 1078—1099.
The successor of Herman was the well-known and illustrious
Osmund. He was consecrated by Archbishop Lanfrane, in 1078.
Malmesbury rightly calls him, vir probatissimus. It is so natural
to us—it is part of that hero-worship the power of which few ean
resist—to concentrate our homage on the few that stand out as con-
spieuous for great or holy deeds, that we are in danger of being a
little unjust to the memory of others. And so we have all been
_ wont to speak exelusively of Osmund as our first founder at Old
Sarum. But Herman had begun the work which Osmund carried
out ; just as Herbert Poore, and afterwards Robert Bingham, were
no mean helpers in the work of building the Cathedral at New Sarum,
for which Richard Poore has too often the exclusive credit. Of
course in such undertakings as these there must be many willing
workers. Cathedrals are not built—certainly they are not restored
—inaday. The motto of our Society applies just as much to them,
as to the vast pre-historie works at Avebury or Stonehenge :—
*¢ Multorum manibus grande levatur onus.”
Osmund was the son of Henry, Count of Seez, by Isabella,
daughter of Robert, Duke of Normandy, the father of William the
Conqueror. He was, therefore, nearly connected with the Conqueror
—in faet, in blood, he was his nephew.' He is popularly supposed
to have been Earl of Wiltshire, and by Camden, who, it is alleged,
quotes a MS. life of Osmund as his authority, he is designated also
1See Hatcher and Benson’s ‘‘ Salisbury,” p. 8, note, where extracts are given
from one of the bishop’s records to this effect. The following table will explain
the relationship at a glance :—
ea Duke of Normandy
St
William rsa =trenty, Count of Seez
*« The Conqueror ” i
OsmunD,
166 Bishops of Old Sarum.
Earl of Dorset. Mr. Planché! doubts whether he ever held either
of these last-named dignities—at all events there is no clear evidence
of the fact. In contemporaneous records he is styled simply “Osmund
the Bishop.” It is probable enough that he was Earl (or Count)
of Seez in his own right, for there is no necessity to suppose that
the assumption of the mitre in England terminated his connection
with Normandy his native country.
Osmund would seem to have been employed by the Conqueror in
high and important offices, and, for a time at least, to have been
Chancellor of England. He was engaged as one of the commission-
ers, whose work it was to compile the wonderful record which we
know as Domesday Book. The survey of Grantham and its adjuncts,
which was made by the Lincolnshire commissioners, was probably
his doing to a great extent. If so, his circuit comprehended Derby-
shire, Notts, Yorkshire, Mid-Lancashire, North Lancashire, part of
Westmoreland, Huntingdonshire, and Lincolnshire; truly a great
and arduous work, but so ably performed as to consist well with his
reputation for marvellous abilities.
Osmund was present, in the memorable year 1086, when the king
met all the principal men of his kingdom at “ Sarisberie ”—sixty
thousand in number—and when they not only fully accepted the
Domesday Book as a true “extent” of the whole kingdom, bert
acknowledged William as their lawful sovereign, and “ swore to him
oaths of fealty that they would be faithful to him against all other
men.”
But the great work to which Osmund devoted himself was the
spiritual care of those committed to his charge as Bishop, and, as a
means towards this end, the completion of his Cathedral at Old
Sarum.
For fifteen years we are told the work was in progress, and it is
described as having been built “infra castrum Domini Regis,” i.e.,
within the king’s castle. It was consecrated on April 5th,
1092, but five days afterwards a severe thunderstorm entirely
destroyed the roof of the Church tower, and much injured the
1 Journal of Brit. Archzol, Assoc., xv., 27.
Osmund, 1078—1099. 167
walls of the Cathedral. According to Robert of Gloucester, the
damage done was very considerable, for speaking of the events of
the fifth year of the reign of the Red King he says:—
**So gret lytnynge was the vyfte yer, so that al to nogte
The rof the Chyrch of Salesbury it broute
Rygt evene the vyfte day that he yhalwed was.” *
I am sorry to dissipate any pleasing illusions that take possession’
of men’s minds, especially when they form the subjects of a poet’s
verses. Still I must own that I can hardly bring myself to believe
that the outlines of the foundations which Hatcher and Bowles profess:
to have traced after an unusually dry summer, in 1834, were those
of Osmund’s Cathedral. I will give you presently my reasons for
thinking that possibly there were ¢wo Cathedrals built during the
one hundred and fifty years whilst the see was at Old Sarum, and
that the outlines traced by the poet Bowles were those of the second
of these buildings. For the large size—it must have been nearly
300 feet from east to west, and about 550 across the transepts, since
it is represented in the sketch given in Bowles’ Lacock as having
been cruciform—seems to shut us out from the belief that it could
have been Osmund’s Cathedral." We know that the early founders
of Christian Churches were content with buildings of small size and
very humble pretensions, nor did the custom of superseding them by
large Churches become the fashion till a later period than the days
of Herman, or Osmund. The many years—fifteen in all—that the
first Cathedral was in building, may of course be urged against this
view, still there are other reasons which I think are of sufficient
weight to support it, and these I will place before you when J come
’ to speak of one of Osmund’s successors.
But Osmund did more than build a Cathedral : he formed a Cathe-
dral ehapter, a body that, in those days, was not only a necessity but
* Robert of Gloncester’s Chronicle (Hearne’s ed.) p. 416.
1 Bowles’ Lacock, p. 363, See also an engraving in Hatcher and Benson’s
Salisbury, p. 49.
? As a proof of this I may mention S. Aldhelm’s. “ Ecclesiola,” at Bradford-
on-Avon, the nave of which is only 25 feet long and 13 feet wide. The origi-
nal cathedral at Llandaff was much the same size. See Freeman on Llandaff
_ Cathedral, p. 46.
168 Bishops of Old Sarum.
a reality. And this he formed on the usual Norman model, with the
“ Quatuor Persone” at its head, viz., the dean, precentor, chancellor,
treasurer, together with four archdeacons, and thirty-two canons—not
prebendaries, as some will have it—for the words of his charter are
plain enough—ef# in ed /i.e. ecclesia) canonicos constituisse ; and, to
say the truth, Osmund had for many years slumbered peacefully in
his tomb before the introduction of a title which, even when it lad
a meaning, only told of the conversion of certain estates, intended
for the benefit of the community, for the special benefit of individual
canons.’ Of the chapter thus constituted, the bishop was the un-
doubted and recognised head—the whole body of canons forming his
council which he summoned on all emergencies. In accordance with
“English custom” his canons (who were what were usually termed
“canons secular”) lived each in his own house, and some of them
were probably married men. But none of them, whether dignitaries
or not, had any corporate existence in the Cathedral Chureh apart
from the bishop, for all lived on the common property of the
Church, and the canons were the bishop’s immediate companions
and assistants, as well .in the services of the mother Church as in
the general management of the diocese. It was the appropriation
of certain “ prebende ” or “ estates ” to special dignities or canonries,
that perhaps, more than any other cause, gradually made chapters
more and more independent of the bishop, though the full divorce
between them did not take place till the Reformation. Then, by
degrees, deans asserted an independent jurisdiction as against bishops,
and each canon claimed to be independent, for many purposes, both of
the bishop and his brethren, and vicars to be independent of canons,
holding each his separate estate, his separate patronage, his separate
jurisdiction.?
Another pleasing illusion I must also disperse. People talk of the
1The earliest mention of a ‘‘distinct” prebend as the endowment of a
Canonry, according to Mr. Mackenzie Walcot, does not reach beyond the reign
of Edward I. Traditions, &c., of Cathedrals, p. 13. The earliest entry at
Salisbury is of the date 1297 (the time of Bishop Simon of Ghent), in the oldest
of our episcopal registers.
2See Freeman’s ‘‘ Norman Conquest,” y. 497, and his History of the Cathe-
dral of Wells, pp. 88, 173.
Osmund, 1078—1099. 169
immense wealth of Osmund, and his boundless generosity in endowing
the Cathedral Church. An expression used in his foundation charter
in which he speaks of having bestowed certain estates on his Church *
* even as he had obtained them from the king,” has somewhat misled
them. To say the truth, the estates were, at all events to a great
extent, the old endowments of the bishoprics of Sherborne and
Ramsbury. In theory all such estates would on any vacancy be,
for the time being, in the possession of the crown; and all that
Osmund did was to give a definite form to his Cathedral foundation,
after receiving back those estates from William the Conqueror. I
May mention in passing, that in the enumeration of these estates,
those in Dorset are invariably named first ; and, in the Cathedral,
the seat next to the dean was assigned afterwards to the archdeacon
of Dorset, as though in recognition of the respect due to the ancient
see of Sherborne, which, like that ef Winchester, had been the
mother-see of several daughter churches.
I must say a word or two in passing of the fellow-workers that
Osmund gathered round him. His canons are said to have been
noted for their learning, and their skill in music. Malmesbury
speaks of the “ Canonicorum claritas cantibus et literatura juata
nobilium.’* Osmund did his best to attach such to him by liberal
pecuniary help, and he furthered their taste for reading and musie
by purchasing or transcribing manuscripts, and himself willingly
turning ‘ book-binder” for the better preservation of his literary
treasures.’
A word also must be said as to what is commonly termed
the ‘‘ Use of Sarum,” which Osmund compiled. The immediate
eause of this compilation was the attempt to introduce into this
country a new style of chanting invented by William of Fescamp
_in Normandy, which the bishops and abbots, who towards the close
of the eleventh century were principally of Norman origin, en-
deavoured to force on the Saxon monks. Amongst others Abbot
1Gest. Pontif., 184.
x 2«TVibrorum copia conquisita, cum episcopus ipse nec scribere, nec scriptos
_ ligare, fastidiret.” Gest. Pont. p. 184.
170 Bishops of Old Sarum.
Thurstan (A.D. 1083) attempted to thrust it on the monks of
Glastonbury. On their strenuously resisting the attempt tumult
and bloodshed ensued, armed soldiers driving the monks from the
ehapter and slaying many of them in the Church.'!' On account of
this outrage the attention of Osmund, then not only Bishop of
Sarum but Chancellor of England (A.D. 1085), is said to have been
drawn to the variety of ritual used in the different Churches.? Hence
on the occasion of the vpening of his new Cathedral he resolved to
revise all the service-books. Collecting together a body of clergy
learned and skilled in chanting, he carefully remodelled the existing
offices,? and the Usr or Sarum was wholly or partially adopted in
various parts of England, especially in the south.
One characteristic feature in Osmund was reverence for the
memory of St. Aldhelm, the holy man who some three hundred years
before presided over the large diocese out of which his own had been
taken. Osmund was thus a successor of St. Aldhelm; and what
wonder, that with so much in his own character of a similar hue he
should be a devotee of that remarkable man? In his own diocese
there was everything to remind him of Aldhelm’s self-denying
labours, and to stimulate him to follow in Aldhelm’s footsteps.
There was Malmesbary over which Aldhelm had so long presided as
abbot—Bradford where he had founded a little Church, an ece/esio/a,
happily still remaining to us—Bishopstrow, the scene no doubt of
some of his missionary labours, taking its name from its early bishop,
its Church still dedicated to him—Doulting, hard at hand, in the
little wooden Church of which he peacefully breathed forth his Vune
Dimittis. Hence no sooner was Osmund consecrated than we find
him officiating at the translation of Aldhelm’s remains to a fitting
shrine at Malmesbury, and helping, together with Archbishop
Lanfranc, to obtain his canonization, or admission into the calendar
1See Simeon of Durham (Decem Scriptores col, 212) and Anglo Sax. Chron.
sub unno. 1083,
2 Palmer’s ‘‘ Origines Liturg.,”” pp. 186, seq.
8 «* His composuit librum ordinalem ecclesiastici officii quem consuetudina-
rium yvocant, quo fere tota nunc (c. A.D. 1200) Anglia, Wallia, et Hibernia
utitur.” Brompton’s Chron. col, 977,
ee
Osmund, 1078—1099. 171
of saints. Of course a number of miracles, wrought, as was affirmed,
by St. Aldhelm, were brought forward in attestation of his sanctity.
But no history at that time was without alleged miracles—they
were part of the unquestioned belief and tacit assumption of all, and
undoubtedly Osmund believed in them.’
Two anecdotes gleaned from the chroniclers bearing on this belief,
or, if you will, this credulity, may amuse you. Having solicited from
Warin, Abbot of Malmesbury, some small portion of the remains
of St. Aldhelm, and having obtained thankfully the bone of the
left arm, Osmund deposited the same with all reverence in a silver
reliquary at Salisbury. Two of his dignified clergy—both archdeacons
of Sarum—had cause to thank their bishop for his fatherly thought
for the faithful in his diocese. Everard, prostrate with a disease
that paralyzed his whole frame, insomuch that as Malmesbury says,
he could not move hand or foot, or any member save his tongue,
was carried on a couch on All Saints’ Day, when the precious relic
was solemnly deposited in its shrine, and was restored to perfect
health, and some years afterwards was consecrated as Bishop of
Norwich. MHubald was afflicted with stammering, and sundry
excrucriating pains in the neck and shoulders. Formerly, when
staying at Malmesbury, he had received relief from similar maladies
by touching the saint’s bier. His sickness returning at Salisbury,
the Archdeacon begs that at a grand “ function ” to be carried out
on the approaching Ascension Day, “quo die per totam Christianitatem
paratur processio accurate solemnis,” he may have the high privilege
of carrying the arm-bone of St. Aldhelm in processsion. The bishop
solemnly hands the precious relic to his archdeacon. His tongue is
loosed, and all his pains vanish immediately on his touching the
saint’s arm-bone.” We smile at the credulity of those early days,
and yet I almost think that the superstition, which so readily believes
everything, is preferable to that cold scepticism which seems resolved
on believing nothing.
One or two stray notes throwing light on Osmund’s character are,
I hope, worth placing before you.
1 See Church’s Life of S. Anselm, p. 239.
2 Gest. Pontif., 429—431.
172 Bishops of Old Sarum.
It is no part of my subject to explain the cause of the quarrel
between the Red King and Archbishop Anselm. The question of
investitures was one on which, at the first, different views were taken
by men equally well affected towards the interests of the Church.!
It is certain that Osmund at one time felt that Anselm, of whom he
had been one of the consecrators, was needlessly scrupulous, and
so sided with the king, his near kinsman. The Lateran Council, at
which Anselm had been present, had however decided that investi-
tures should not be made by the king. And so as time went on,
and it became evidently a dispute between the righteous man and
the unrighteous—between the man who was ready to saerifice all
for what he felt to be his duty, and the man into whose mind duty
never entered, but whose whole and simple intention was to make
the interests of the Church subservient to his own—then Osmund
boldly took his side with the saintly Anselm. And so when the
archbishop was on his way to Windsor, whither he had been sum-
moned to meet the king, Osmund followed hiin, and asked his for-
giveness. They turned, as Eadmer tells us, into a little Church by
the way, and there, kneeling before the archbishop, Osmund con-
fessed his error, and received the good man’s blessing.”
A year after this occurrence, we find Osmund fearlessly exercising
his ministry as the chief pastor of his flock. Certain leading men,
accused, rightly or wrongly, of a conspiracy against the king’s life,
were, with a savage and indiscriminating ferovity, some exiled, some
put to death. The king’s kinsman, Count William of Eu, who had
served him so well in his foreign wars, was appealed of treason by
Geoffrey of Baynard before the assembled “ witan ” at Salisbury and
being worsted in the judicial combat, was blinded and foully
1 «¢ The particular shape of this dispute,” says Mr. Freeman, ‘‘ was impossible
in earlier times. When the Church and nation were in the strictest sense two
aspects of the same body a dispute between Church and State could hardly have
arisen. But the Conqueror had brought in a new policy in ecclesiastical matters.
By separating the ecclesiastical and temporal jurisdiction, he had taught men
that Church and State were two distinct bodies, which, being distinct, might
possibly be hostile.”—** Norman Conquest,” v. 129. See also iy. 438.
2 Church’s Life of Anselm, p. 216,
ras
5 NG aint
Osmund, 1078—1099, 173
mutilated. Another, William of Aldrie, also closely connected with
the king—the chronicler calls him compater—was condemned to
be scourged at every Church at Sarum, and then to be hanged.
William de Aldrie protested his innocence to the last, and, as it
would appear, to the satisfaction of the bishop, but no efforts could
save him. The bishop received him to his last confession, and
“ then, commending his soul to God, sprinkled him with holy water,
and so departed.”
William of Malmesbury, in summing up Osmund’s character, says,
that he was “so pre-eminent for chastity that common fame would
itself blush to speak otherwise than truthfully concerning his virtue.
Stern he might appear towards penitents, but not more severe to
them than to himself. Free from ambition, he neither sought others’
wealth, nor wasted his own imprudently.” !
Osmund died December 3rd, 1099, his last days having been at-
tended with much suffering, endured with much patience.? Three
hundred years afterwards, due enquiry having been first made, he
was admitted into the calendar of saints. In the convocation of
prelates and clergy in St. Paul’s, in 1481, the festival of St. Osmund
was directed to be kept.2 A document relating to the canonization
of Osmund was discovered in the Cathedral muniment room a short
time ago. Some careful hand had made a copy of it in the fifteenth
century, and it is included in a MS. volume of documents relating
to Salisbury, just now in my possession, an account of which, though
far from accurate, was given in one of the reports of the Historical
Manuscripts Commision.*
A flat stone with the simple date MXCIX upon it, is said once
to have covered Osmund’s remains, and to have been brought with
’ Castitate preeminens ; de cujus virtute mentiri erubesceret fame volubilitas.
Unde fiebat ut penitentibus asperior equo videretur, dum quod in se non
inveniret in aliis durius vindicaret. Ambitionis immunis, sua stulte non
perdere, aliena non querere.” Gest. Pont., 184,
2“Quseque mundiali labe contracta creditur patientia sua luisse, dinturno
morbo ante mortem tabefactus.” Gest. Pont , 185.
$ Wilkins’ Concil, iii., 613.
* Report i., pp. 90—95,
174 Bishops of Old Sarum.
them from Old Sarum. Mr. Planché remarks ! that the letters on
it correspond in form with those on the seal of William the Conqueror,
and others of the eleventh century, and that sepulchral effigies are
not found much before the middle of the twelfth, so that the appro-
priation is probable enough. The slab, which for many years lay in
the north aisle, has recently been removed to the centre of the Lady
Chapel, the place where Osmund’s remains were deposited when
brought from Old Sarum for re-interment in 1225,the year when that
portion of the present Cathedral, (all that was then built,) was “ hal-
lowed” by Bishop Richard Poore,
Roger, 1107—1139.
For some years after Osmund’s decease there was no bishop con-
secrated for Sarum. This was owing in part to the grasping avarice
of the Red King, who purposely left the bishoprics unfilled that he
might appropriate their revenues to his own use. It is said that he
was advised to adopt this course by no less a personage than Ralph
Flambard, who held the see of Durham from 1099 till 1133. On
the day that Rufus fell by the chance arrow in the New Forest, he
held in his own hands, by confiscation or otherwise, the archbishopric
of Canterbury, the bishoprics of Winchester and Salisbury, and no
less than eleven abbacies.
As soon as Henry I. came to the throne, an appeal was made to
him to fill up the vacant sees. To the bishopric of Winchester he
nominated William Giffard. Sarum he gave to his chancellor Roger,
originally a poor priest of Caen, “of a contemptible and base be-
ginning,” ? who at first pleased Henry, it is said, by the speed with
which he got through his mass, and who had followed him through
his adverse fortunes. Hereford was given to another Roger—the
superintendent or clerk of his larder—who however died shortly
after his nomination, when, in his place, was named Reinhelm, a
clerk of the Royal Chapel. The king now called on Anselm to
1 Journal of Archeol. Assoc.; xv., 129.
? Dean Pierce, in his Defence of the King’s Sovereign right, p. 42.
Roger, 1107—1189. 175
consecrate the three bishops designate.’ But the archbishop refused ;
at all events with regard to those appointed to Sarum and Hereford.
The king then called on Gerard, Archbishop of York, to consecrate
them. He was ready to consecrate anybody; but scruples on the
part of the bishops designate prevailed. Reinhelm, appointed to
Hereford, at once gave back “the staff and ring” to the king.?
William Giffard suffered banishment and spoiling of his goods, rather
than allow a wrongful consecration. Of Roger, named to Sarum,
it is said, “predicanda prudentia ita rem temperavit, ut nec Regem
irritaret nec Archiepiscopo injuriam faceret ;’’* that is (freely tran-
slated) he managed matters with such singular prudence, that he
neither irritated the king nor injured the cause of the archbishop.*
And these few words of Malmesbury are really a key to the character
of Bishop Roger, for he, no less than Anselm, had been present at
the Lateran Council when investitures from the king had been
condemned. He was literally a man who tried “to serve two mas-
ters.” Never, in truth, was there a greater contrast than between
Roger and his predecessor Osmund. ‘The one of noble birth and a
descendant of kings, the other of humble unknown parentage and a
simple child of fortune. The one essentially a saintly man, giving
himself wholly to the duties of his high calling ; the other a wordly
minded man, all through his life the crafty time-serving statesman.
Roger was nevertheless a man of undoubted genius, “ a fair type of
those Norman bishops of the twelfth century, promoted from the
temporal service of the king, able statesmen, and often magnificent
1 See Church’s Life of Anselm, 263, 267.
2 All Bishoprics at the first were merely donative by the delivery ofa ‘staff
and ring” by the king. ‘They do not seem to have been elective till the reign
of King John. See Dean Pierce ‘‘ King’s Sovereign Rights,” p. 4.
3 Gest. Pontif., 110.
4The whole dispute on the subject of investitures is graphically told by Dean
Church in his Life of Anselm. See also Freeman’s Norman Conquest, v. 218—
a 225, where it is well said that ‘‘ the difference between Anselm and Henry I.
was a question not of abstract right or wrong, but between the law of England
and the innovations of Rome.” The king was very firm in resisting the claims
of the Pope according to the chronicler.—‘‘ Quid mihi de meis cum Papa?
Que antecessores mei hoc in regno possiderunt mei sunt ”—such are said to have
been among his asseverations.
176 Bishops of Old Sarum.
builders, who left behind them, some on the whole a good, others
on the whole a bad memory in their dioceses, but none of whom
could lay claim to the character of saints.” '
At last all difficulties being overcome by the compromise that the
prelates should do homage to the king, whilst he should surrender
his right to invest them with the “ ring and staff,’ Roger, together
with four others, was consecrated at Canterbury in August, 1107.
Roger, in addition to the see of Sarum, held the high office of
Chancellor and Justiciar, the latter office implying that the chief
administration of the kingdom was in his hands. In truth, under
him the office of Justiciar became more distinct. He is called
“ secundus a Rege,’ i.e., “ second after the King.” In fact the whole
system of administration, which was brought to perfection in Henry’s
reign, was chiefly his work. The exchequer was organised by him,
and the well-known “ Dialogus de Scaccario ” was, if I mistake not,
the work of Nigel, Bishop of Ely, who was in blood a grandson, or
at all events, a great nephew of his.
Of course the great blot on Roger’s character was his conduct in
the matter of the succession to the crown. Robert of Gloucester
distinctly states that Roger perjured himself ; and Roger de Hoveden,
in affirming the same, mentions as an act of retributive justice the
fact, that the very man whom, in defiance of his oath twice sworn,
he had crowned, was the cause of his ruin. At the great council
held in 1126, Roger together with others, swore fealty to the Em-
press Matilda and distinctly accepted her as “ Lady over England
and Normandy,” and the succession was confirmed by renewed oaths
in 1131; and yet three or four years afterwards he was one of the
three bishops who helped to crown Stephen as king. He excused
himself by alleging that the oath taken was on the condition that
the future Lady of England should not marry without the consent
of the great council, and that he was absolved from that oath, when
Matilda married, as a second husband, Geoffrey son of FPulk of
Anjou. But certainly he would have stood on far higher ground, if
like Theobald the archbishop he had remained true to his first oath,
even though like Theobald he had been exiled for his fidelity.
1 Freeman’s ‘‘ Norman Conquest,’’ vy. 216.
Roger, 1107—1139. 177
Most of the notices of Bishop Roger have reference to his duties
in discharge of one or other of the high offices of state which he
filled. But even in these he did not always use his influence for the
advantage of the Church. Thus we are distinctly told that when
Godfrey, Bishop of Bath, tried to get back some of the lands of his
canons which had been misappropiated, “ King Henry and Roger
Bishop of Sarum, who was a mighty man in those days, hindered
him.”! On another occasion however he was rebuked for his arrogance.
In consequence of the archbishop Ralph d’ Escures being unable
through paralysis to conduct the ceremony of espousals between Henry
I. and his second wife Adelais of Lorraine, Roger claimed the right,
inasmuch as Windsor was in the diocese of Sarum. The archbishop
however stoutly refused to allow him to officiate, even though he had
vested himself for the purpose, but committed the duty to William
de Giffard, Bishop of Winchester.’
Bishop Roger is recorded as having been present at the dedication
of St. Alban’s Church in 1116, and also in 1130 when the Cathedral
of Canterbury was “hallowed.” He was also present at various
synods that were held for the better government of the Church, and
for the exercise of discipline, which was most necessary in conse-
quence of the admitted irregularities prevailing among the clergy.
At more than one of these synods a decree was passed forbidding
marriage to all churchmen of the rank of sub-deacon and upwards.
William of Malmesbury says distinctly that Bishop Roger “‘ dwi/é
anew” the Church of Salisbury. We know that he was a great
builder. Salisbury, Malmesbury, Devizes, Sherborne, all bore wit-
ness to this. And William of Malmesbury’s words seem plain enough,
for he adds :—“ He beautified his Church thus newly duzlét in such
a manner that it yields to none in England, but surpasses many, so that
he had just cause to say, ‘ Lord, I have loved the glory of Thy House.”
1 Freeman’s Cathedral of Wells, p. 43.
28ee the whole account in Malmesb. Gest. Pontif. p. 133. The Archbishop
went so far as to deny such privilege to appertain to the see of Sarum—‘‘ in
posterum providens, ne quid tale Salesberiensis Episcopus pro privilegio parrochiz
sibi assumeret.”’
3Gest, Reg., B. v. The words are ‘‘ Ecclesiam suam Sarisberiensem et novam
__s Fecit, ct ornamentis excoluit, ut nulli in Anglia cesserit, sed multas precesserit,
&e.”
- VOL, XVII.—NO. L. N
178 Bishops of Old Sarum.
It is just possible that what is really meant is that Roger restored
the Cathedral built by Osmund after its injury by hghtning, and,
it may be, enlarged it; for Osmund died no long time after his
Cathedral was so injured. Nevertiicless I own that, accepting this
statement as it stands, we seem driven to the conclusion that a second
Cathedral superseding Osmund’s, on possibly a much larger scale, was
built by Bishop Roger. There is nothing improbable in this, for the
Norman prelates built their minsters on a vast scale, far surpassing’
what they were used to in their own country. Nor did the Norman
architects scruple to destroy the English Churches which they found.
They were too small for the grand conception of the Norman prelates
and architects; and it is absurd to suppose that buildings of less
than a century old could have needed rebuilding on the score of
decay. And so, I repeat, that though nothing more may be meant
than that he completely repaired the Church so much injured by
lightning, yet there is nothing in the probabilities of the case to
hinder us from believing that a second Cathedral, on a grander scale
than Osmund’s, rose at Old Sarum at the bidding of the great master
builder of the day.’
For indeed Roger was the great architectural genius of the twelfth
century. In his own person—I am indebted for the substance of
these remarks to Mr. E. A. Freeman—he brought to perfection that
later form of Norman architecture, lighter and richer than the
earlier type, which slowly died out before the introduction of the
pointed arch and its accompanying details. Malmesbury speaks
of his edifices as having surpassing beauty, “the courses of stones
1A passage in the ‘‘ Acts of Stephen” (Bohn’s edition, p. 371), would seem
to support the view advanced above ; for, after stating that vast quantities of
treasure left by Bishop Roger in the Church of Sarum fell into the king’s hands
on his death it says: —‘‘ The king applied part of the money to roofing the Church,
and part for relieving the wants of the canons; and the lands, and possessions,
which the bishop had appropriated, he restored to the Churches and ecclesiastical
uses, and reinstating the two Churches of Malmesbury and Abbotsbury in their
ancient splendour, caused the abbots of those monasteries to be canonically en-
throned.” It is right however to state that the anonymous writer of the ‘‘ Acts
of Stephen” was a partizan of that king; and that Henry of Huntingdon, a
eontemporary writer, speaks more favourably of Bishop Roger, or at least does
not quite so indiscriminately condemn him.
OO lt teal)
|
|
:
;
4
4
$
.
2
» Roger, 1107—1139. 179
being so correctly laid that the joint deceives the eye, and leads it
to imagine that the whole wall is composed of a single block.” His
creative genius was in advance of his age, At first it seems a trial
of our faith to believe that the work of Roger in the castle of
Sherborne, and the few fragments that are left in his castle of The
Devizes, really belong to the reign of Henry I., and not to the reign
of Henry II. And yet it is the case: a great architect struck out
a path for himself in an age of comparative peace. The style which
had come in at the bidding of Roger was copied by lesser men
almost a generation after his time. The greater lightness and
and richness of Roger’s work became the fashion in the days of
Henry II. and, when the fashion had once set in, lightness and
richness went on increasing.
I must not omit, without a passing remark, the fact, that Roger’s
episcopate marks a great change in the ecclesiastical state of England,
as regarded the increasing distance between the bishop, as chief
‘pastor, and the flock over which he had been placed. The bishop
now became a feudal lord, and the clergy his vassals. Claims of
state occupied the bishop’s time ; and the care of the diocese became
committed more and more to suffragans. Even when in his diocese
his baronial character led him rather to his castle, or rural manor,
‘than to the palace under the shadow of his own Church. He was
‘for the most part the absent lord and visitor, rather than the present
head of his Cathedral. And so everything, as it has been said,
“helped to stiffen the fatherly care of the bishop of souls into a
formal jurisdiction exercised according to a rigid technical law.
There were, of course, bishops who rose above the temptations among
which they were placed, but the general tendency to secularity
prevailed, and put on a worse form through the changes which
followed upon the Conquest.” !
Of course, Bishop Roger’s remarkable rise made him many enemies.
Men saw him daily increasing in wealth, in influence, and it is to be
feared also, in arrogance. Nor were bis great works always carried
out with a due regard to the just claims of others. Malmesbury
1See Freeman’s ‘‘ Norman Conquest,” y. 497.
N 2
180 Bishops of Old Sarum.
tells distinctly (Hist. Nov. B. 2, Giles’ edition, p. 508) that
“if there were anything contiguous to his property which might
be advantageous to him, he would directly extort it, either by entreaty,
or purchase; or, if that failed, by force. He attempted to turn
abbeys into bishoprics, and bishopries into abbeys. The most
ancient monasteries of Malmesbury and Abbotsbury he annexed,
as far as he was able, to his see. He changed the priory of Sher-
borne, which is subject to the Bishop of Sarum, into an abbey ;
and the abbey of Horton was forthwith dissolved and united with it.”
The same writer adds that he also obtained for himself the town of
Malmesbury ; and without doubt his fortress there involved a direct
encroachment on the rights of the ancient monastery of that place.
And when at his bidding arose the great castles of Sherborne, and
of The Devizes, the latter built on a mighty mound of elder days,
surpassed by no building of their kind in Europe, we hardly wonder
that complaints were many and loud, when men contrasted, with his
present greatness and power, his slender beginnings as the “ poor
clerk at Caen.” He is even said to have had influence to have got
into his possession the castle of Old Sarum and to have surrounded
it with a wall.!. In truth, both he and his episcopal nephews—some
said they were his sons—one of them advanced to the see of Lincoln,
the other to that of Ely, had given much offence and scandal by
their overweening worldly pomp and aggressive policy. Men
whispered too of his licentious life, and called Maud of Ramsbury,
the mother of Roger who became afterwards the Chancellor, his
concubine. Buta possible interpretation may be given, less injurious
to Roger’s character, if she had been (as has been suggested)
married to him before 1102; when, by a decree of the synod at
‘ Westminster marriage was forbidden to all churchmen of the rank
of sub-deacon and upwards. Anyhow, the loyalty of a man, who
had twice sworn fealty to Matilda and yet had crowned Stephen,
was not unnaturally suspected. When he feigned one excuse after
another for not obeying various summonses to court, it was fully
1Malmesbury’s words are ‘‘Castellum Salesberie, quod regit juris proprium
esset, ab Henrico Rege impetratum, muro cinctum, custodie sue attraxerat.”’
oe x
IO PS
Roger, 1107—1139. 181
believed that he was actually plotting with the Empress and her
partizans. At last a peremptory order is issued commanding his
attendance at a Great Council at Oxford. He goes, though most
unwillingly, having a special foreboding of evil coming upon him.
A disturbance between the retainers of Count Alan of Richmond -
and those of the Bishops of Sarum and Lincoln is made the
excuse for seizing the latter and imprisoning them. Bishop Roger
was treated with especial severity and indignity. His castle at The
Devizes, which had been left to the keeping of Maud of Ramsbury,
was besieged, till its surrender was obtained by threats of hanging
the chancellor, his son, and keeping the father without meat or drink.
In the end all Bishop Roger’s castles—at Salisbury, Sherborne,
Devizes, and Malmesbury—were given into the king’s hands. At
a synod held shortly afterwards at Winchester, Theobald the arch-
bishop, and the Bishop of Winchester, Stephen’s brother, protested
against the king’s violent conduct. Stephen made a show of sub-
mission, but restitution was out of the question. He held fast to
the castles which he had seized.
Before the end of that same eventful year—on December 4th,
1189—Bishop Roger died, a broken-hearted man, his death hastened
by the harshness of the treatment he endured. As he was nearly
breathing his last sigh at Old Sarum, the residue of his money and
treasure, which he had placed upon the altar for the purpose of com-
pleting his Church, was carried off against his wish. Malmesbury
tells us that it moved his pity to think “ how few really pitied Bishop
Roger in his fall, so much envy and dislike had his excessive power
drawn upon him, and undeservedly too from some of those very
persons whom he himself advanced to honor.”
There are two sepulchral effigies, now lying near the south-west
end of the nave of the Cathedral, one of which—authorities are
divided on the subject—has been supposed to be that of Bishop
Roger. I think no one—I speak however with diffidence on a
subject which I have not made a special study—ean doubt from
their general character, that the one with the Latin inscrip-
tion down the centre of the chasuble and round the edge of the
slab is the older of the two, and I think I shall be able to give
182 ' Bishops of Old Sarum.
convincing proof that ¢his is the memorial of Roger’s successor,
Bishop Jocelin. It follows, therefore, that the other cannot be that
of Bishop Roger. I am sorry to scatter to the winds another well-
worn tale. But as sepulchral effigies are seldom found before the
middle of the twelfth century, I am inclined to think, that, if Roger
has any memorial at all in the present Cathedral, it is rather to
be sought in one of those flat stone coffin-lids with a cross upon it,
of which there are several lying in the Cathedral. In fact in the
“ Ichnographical Plan” of our Cathedral printed by Mr. Chambers,
the Recorder of Salisbury, from one of the date of 1733—the
oldest one, as far as I know, which shews an arrangement of
the interior—it is distinctly said that Roger’s monumental slab was
a plain stone with a cross, and it is marked as lying underneath a
shallow recess in the wall in the north-east part of the Cathe-
dral.t
Bishop Roger was undoubtedly a great statesman, but, making
every allowance for the exaggerated statements of partizans, he
certainly left behind him no cherished memory of his work as a
Bishop of the Church of Christ. In truth, other Bishops too often
involved themselves in worldly matters, to the neglect of their own
high and proper vocation, after his example.? And his own Church
at Sarum, though, in its calendar of obits, it had special days of
commemoration for Osmund his predecessor, and also for Jocelin
who succeeded him, gave no place therein, as far as we know, to the
memory of—Bishop Roger.
—_——$<$<$_—$_—$$—$
tThere also, in Price’s time, (1774,) the monument reputed to be that of
Bishop Roger would seem to have been lying, for he speaks of him as having
been ‘buried within an arch of the north aisle.” In an early MS. note to an
original edition (1615) of Godwin’s ‘ Praesules” Dr. Milner found the following
passage :—‘‘ In the body of the Church under the third arch from the tomb
of Bishop Roger was the altar called de missa matutinali where the early
private service was performed, &c.” This was no doubt the first of the eastern
chapels in the north-east transept.
2 Episcopi temporis hujus se negotiis secularibus immiscentes et comitatus
affectantes, seu vicecomitatus, vel castellaneos, Rogerum quondam bone me-
morie Sarisberiensem episcopum reyocent ad memoriam. R. de Diceto,
p. 652.
as
Jocelin, 1142—1184, 183
Jocetin, 1142—1184.
After Roger’s death the see of Sarum was vacant for three years ;
—and eventful years they were. For on September 30th, 1139, five
weeks only after the bishop’s death, the Empress Matilda landed in
England. His decease, miserable as it was, may have been an
escape from yet greater troubles; for his treachery to the Empress
would never have been passed over, when, two years afterwards, she
gained such an ascendancy in Wiltshire and was im possession of
nearly the whole of England.
It has long seemed strange to me that so little has really been
known of a bishop who held the see for more than forty years. One
reason is that a great mistake has been made respecting him.
Hitherto, everyone has been calling him Jocelin de Bailleul. But
he—Jocelin de Bailleul—was no bishop at all, but a household officer
in the court of the Empress, who was with her at Devizes in 1142.
He was still 2 court officer on the accession of Henry Fitz-Empress,
in 1154. He was one of those whom Becket excommunicated at
Vezelay in 1166, and that which probably originated the confusion
between him and the Bishop of Sarum was that the latter was also
excommunicated on the same occasion. .
But Bishop Jocelin was a member of the great Norman family of
Bohun.' He had been Archdeacon’ of Winchester under Henry of
* The following table will shew Bishop Jocelin’s connection with the great
family of Bohun, and those of his-own immediate descendants who held high
offices in the Church :—
Humfrey Bohun Edward of Salisbury
surnamed ede eh (Sheriff of Wilts temp. Domesday),
|
Humfrey.=Matilda.
Richard
(or De Mai, Test. de N. 184).
Gs Bohuns, Earls of Hereford.
(daughter) "ipco de Cotentin..
[ |
Seilses ‘ae Bohun aughter= .,.cccccccersoee ©
Justiciary of Normandy, I
0b. s.p. ; |
JOCRLIN==. 2. cosvassvevsceve Richard
Bishop of Sarum Bishop of Constance,
(1142—1184). 1151, ob. 1179.
L
Reginald rhts-Tooelin daughter=Geldewyn Fitz-Savaric
Archdeacon of Sarum, c. 1150, of Midhurst.
Bishop of Bath and Wells, 1174. * Savaric de Bohun
ob. 1191, Treasurer of Sarum, ec. 1190,
’
Bishop of Bath and Glastonbury, 1192.
ob. 1205, eee
184 Bishops of Old Sarum.
Blois, brother of King Stephen ; and when justly angry because of
that king’s treatment of the Church, and possibly under the im-
pression that Matilda’s triumph was at hand, that bishop took part
against his brother, then Jocelin de Bohun became Bishop of Sarum.
Humphrey de Bohun was her great champion who so gallantly de-
fended the castle at Trowbridge against Stephen, and it was a fitting
reward that his kinsman should be advanced tv the see of Sarum.
Of course, at the death of Stephen and the accession of the son of
Matilda as Henry II., there was none to challenge his rightful
appointment, and no trial of his own loyalty.
It would appear that King Stephen endeavoured, immediately
after the death of Bishop Roger, to obtain the see of Sarum for
Philip de Harecurt, his chancellor, who would seem also to have
been Dean of Lincoln, The appointment was however strongly
opposed by Henry of Blois, the king’s brother, then Bishop of
Winchester and papal legate, who, it is said, wished to obtain it
for his own nephew. ‘The strong opposition manifested against both
candidates caused the matter to be postponed.’ The triumph of
Matilda, and the imprisonment of Stephen, in 1141, of course
changed matters entirely. Philip de Harecurt got his reward in
the bishopric of Bayonne, and Jocelin de Bohun, one of a family
that through all her conflicts had been true to the Empress Matilda,
became in 1142, during her temporary triumph, Bishop of Sarum.
It was no doubt to his rightful influence with the Empress Matilda,
that, during the time of her ascendancy in England, she restored
into the hands of the bishop the possessions wrested from his pre-
decessors by King Stephen; notably the estates of Potterne and
Cannings which had always belonged to the see. There are few
more interesting documents to my mind than those charters, still
preserved among the bishop’s records, by which, first of all, the
Empress Matilda, and, in due course, her son Henry II., gave back
to the bishop and his cathedral i aa the estates of which they
had been unjustly deprived.?
1 Neustria Pia, p. 233.
2See Hatcher and Benson’s Salisbury, pp. 724—726,
Jocelin, 1142—1184. 185
Jocelin succeeded to the see of Sarum in troublous times. The
misery and distress that prevailed throughout England, in consequence
of the civil wars, is well known. The chronicles abound in harrowing
details of the sufferings endured on all sides. We have only to read
the interesting and anonymous chronicle entitled “ Acta Stephani”
to be at once fully conscious of the wretched state of things. Bishop
Jocelin, who from the few glimpses that we can glean of his character
would seem to have been a man who cared little for worldly pomp,
and who sought the rather to give himself up to the sacred duties
of his calling, was certainly hardly fitted to grapple with the diffi-
culties which encumbered him. Moreover he seems always to have
been of a weakly constitution, which unfitted him for great activity.
One indication of his care for his Cathedral appears in his grant of
a virgate of land for the “correction of the books ” belonging to
his Church, an office which especially belonged to the chancellor of
the Cathedral, at that time “ Philippus de Sancto Edwardo,” whom
he addresses as “ clericus noster et con-canonicus.” *
At a very early period in his episcopate a council was held in
London for the purpose of taking measures for the protection of the
clergy from oppressions of various kinds. “ At this period” says
Robert de Hoveden, writing of the year 1143, “ no respect was paid
by those who plundered to either the clergy or the Church of God,
and, whether clerks or laymen, they were equally taken prisoners
and held to ransom. Upon this the Bishop of Winchester, the
Roman legate, held a council at London, which at the time was
absolutely necessary for the safety of the clergy. At this council it
‘was decreed, that no one who should violently lay hands upon a
elerk could possibly receive absolution from any one, not even from
the Pope himself, and appearing in his presence. In consequence
of this, a slight gleam of serenity, with great difficulty, shone forth
at last on the clergy.” ?
The death of Stephen and the accession of Henry, the son of
the Empress Matilda, in 1154, might fairly have been looked to by
1 Hatcher and Benson, p. 726.
2 Roger de Hoveden, sub anno 1143, p. 246 (Bohn’s edition).
186 Bishops of Old Sarum.
Bishop Jocelin as a termination of some of his troubles. But diffi-
culties arose from another quarter. The same year in which Theobald
Archbishop of Canterbury crowned Henry II. as King of England,
he gave to Thomas Becket, his clerk, the archdeaconry of Canterbury.
And within seven years from that time, in 1162, Jocelin, together
with no less than thirteen other bishops, consecrated Thomas Becket
to the metropolitical see of Canterbury.
Jocelin had at this time been twenty years Bishop of Sarum.
Now his troubles began anew; though arising from a different
source. Of course the disputes between the king and his archbishop
are matters of general history, and need only to be referred to here
so far as they affected Bishop Jocelin. He was of course present at
the council at Clarendon in 1164, at which were framed what are
commonly termed the “ Constitutions of Clarendon,” the objects of
which were to take away from the clergy the immunity they had
hitherto enjoyed, or, at least, claimed, of being tried for offences, of
whatever sort, by none save ecclesiastical judges. It was after one
of these meetings, that, together with other trusty councillors,
Jocelin came to the archbishop, and sought earnestly to reconcile
him with the king, who in consequence of the archbishop’s tergiver-
sation threatened him and his followers with exile and death. “They
threw themselves” says Roger Hoveden “ at the feet of the arch-
bishop, and with tears besought him that he would, for the sake of
the king’s dignity, come to him, and in the presence of the people
declare that he would observe his laws.”
The archbishop was unbending. From his place of exile he pub-
lished his sentence, first of all of suspension, and afterwards of ex-
communication, against Bishop Jocelin. The latter sentence was
also passed on John of Oxford, then Dean of Sarum, who had
taken part with Joceline in seeking to induce the archbishop to
submit to the king’s demands. In no measured terms did Becket
in a letter to his suffragans denounce these two dignitaries of our
Church—and this too in defiance of the protest of the bishops them-
selves who state in a letter to the archbishop—* It is a subject of
concern to us all that such unjust measure has been meted out against
our brother the Bishop of Salisbury and his dean. In following
Jocelin, 1142—1184. 187 |
the warmth of anger rather than the path of justice, you have hurled
the penalties of suspension or condemnation before an enquiry has
taken place as to their faults.” And in their appeal to the Pope,
Alexander III., they complain that their “ brother the Bishop of
Sarum when absent and undefended, having neither confessed to
or being convicted of any crime had been suspended from the sacer-
dotal and episcopal office before the grounds of his suspension had
been submitted to the judgments of his brother bishops of the
province, or indeed of anyone else.” ?
So matters seem to have remained, the archbishop refusing to
_ yield, and still sending his messages, couched in no courteous or
| guarded terms, warning the faithful from holding communion with
_ the Bishop of Sarum. Other bishops, in due course, were included
_ with Jocelin in a similar sentence of suspension and excommunication
—the Archbishop of York, the Bishops of London and of Rochester.
A step however which Jocelin took a few years afterwards, in 1170,
of assisting in the coronation, at Westminster, of Henry, the son of
the reigning king, seems to have brought upon our bishop excom-
_ munication from the Pope himself. In that ceremony the Arch-
_ bishop of Canterbury, to whom of course by right of his see the
coronation and consecration of Prince Henry as the future king
belonged, was entirely passed over. Becket’s anger was then fairly
roused; he made complaint to the Supreme Pontiff, and through
his influence, obtained a formal sentence of excommunication against
-Jocelin and others from the holy See.
Jocelin made great efforts on the return of the archbishop to
_ England, at the close of that year, to be reconciled to him. To-
_ gether with the Archbishop of York and the Bishop of London he
_ went to Dover to meet him, but the archbishop, hearing of their
H ‘purpose, landed elsewhere and so prevented an interview.
Two years afterwards, in 1172, Jocelin succeeded in obtaining a
' removal of the sentence of excommunication. The letters of abso-
| lution were addressed to the Archbishop of Bourges and the Bishop
of Nivernais. It is stated in them that Jocelin was “ worn out with
1 Hoveden sub anno 1167.
2Tbid, sub anno 1167.
188 Bishops of Old Sarnm.
old age and infirmity and labouring under the effects of disease,”
and the bishops were directed not to require his attendance but
themselves to convey to him personally, or by approved messengers,
the absolution of the Pope.?
There is also to be seen in the bishop’s registry an interesting
document from the Pope, signed by a foreign cardinal, to the effect
that Bishop Jocelin had purged himself from any participation in the
death of Thomas & Becket. It was likely enough, that, on account of
the active part taken by himself and his son against Becket, suspicion
should fall on them ; but they were both innocent of any such charge.
In the year 1174 Bishop Jocelin saw his son Reginald Fitz-
Jocelin, who had been Archdeacon of Sarum, promoted to the
bishopric of Bath and Wells. He had been one of the foremost of
the champions of Henry II. against Becket, and had been openly
stigmatised by the archbishop in one of his more truculent letters
as a“ bastard.”? But as Bishop Jocelin commenced life as a layman
it was far more likely that he was born previously to his taking
orders, and therefore was legitimate. This fact may be assumed, I
1In Wilkins’ Concilia all these documents are given. Thus at i., 459, we
have ‘‘Letters of excommunication from Pope Alexander III. of Bishop Joce-
lin,” &c. (ex Reg. Cantuar. A fol. 14 a);—at p 460, ‘Letters inflicting
penances on Bishop Jocelin for crowning King Henry III. without the Arch-
bishop’s consent;”—~and at p 473 ‘Letters of Absolution, addressed to the
Archbishop of Bourges and the Bishop of Nivernais, for the absolution of the
Bishop of Sarum.” See Hoveden, sub anno 1172.
2 Selden in his “ Titles of Honour,” (i., p. 217, ed. 1726,) gives the following
anecdote, which he states as having been recorded by Walter de Mapes, a con-
temporary annalist :—‘‘ Jocelin, Bishop of Salisbury, when his son Reginald,
who was by corrupt means chosen Bishop of Bath and Wells, complained to him
that the Archbishop of Canterbury would not consecrate him, advised him thus:
“ Stulte, velox ad Papam evola securus, nihil hesitando; ipsique bursa grandt
para bonam alapam, et vacillabit quocunque volueris,” Ivit ergo ; percussit
Lic, vacillavit ille:—cecidit Papa, surrexit Pontifex: scripsitque statim in
dominum mentiens, in omnium brevium suorum principiis. Nam ubi debuesset
scribi ‘ burs gratia’ dixit ‘ Det gratia,’” &c. Though there mizht be nothing
antecedently improbable in such a tale at a time when high offices in the church
were too often bought and sold, and the court of Rome no doubt was fairly
amenable to such influences, yet literally true it certainly cannot be. For at
the time of Reginald Fitz-Jocelin’s nomination to the see of Bath, the see of
Canterbury was vacant. King Henry II., in 1174, contrary to the wishes
of his son, nominated Richard, Prior of Dover, to the see of Canterbury, and at
Jocelin, 1142—1184. 198)
think from another, which is apposite enough; viz., that after
Jocelin’s death, Hubert Archdeacon of Canterbury was elected as
his successor, but his nomination being appealed against, the elevation
was set aside on the ground of his illegitimacy. This same Jocelin
Bishop of Bath and Wells was subsequently Archbishop elect of Can-
terbury, but died, in 1194, before his actual removal to the primacy.
In the following year (1175) Bishop Jocelin had the gratification
also of seeing the dean of his cathedral, Johu of Oxford, who had
all along shared his troubles, and with him been the object of the
especial enmity and dislike of Becket,—having been denounced again
and again as an intruder into the office of Dean and ultimately ex-
communicated,—advanced to the sce of Norwich.
After this time we hear little of Bishop Jocelin. Increasing age
and infirmities compelled him to withdraw from active work, and we
find associated with him in the eare of his diocese, as a suffragan,
Geoffrey, who had been Bishop of St. Asaph, but had been compelled
to quit his post through poverty and the hostile invasions of the
Welsh. When he came into England he was kindly received by the
king, who gave the then vacant abbacy of Abingdon into his charge.
He resigned his bishopric in 1175 and after that time would seem
to have been a coadjutor to Bishop Jocelin.
We read of Bishop Jocelin being present at the great council held
at Woodstock in 1175, when the king, and his crowned son, met the
bishops and abbots of tbe principal monasteries, and appointed pastors
to the different sees and abbeys which were then vacant throughout
England. This was but a few months after the celebrated synod of
Westminster, held by Richard Archbishop of Canterbury, in which
were enacted decrees for the correction of the many scandals and
_ abuses that had arisen among the clergy—decrees which themselves
shew the state of things that existed in the Church, and how difficult
the same time Reginald Fitz-Jocelin to the see of Bath. The two went at once
_ to Rome for the purpose of ‘‘ confirming their elections,” which were appealed
against. In the end, Pope Alexander III. consecrated Richard on April 7th,
1174, at Anagni, to the see of Canterbury, and two months afterwards Arch-
_ bishop Richard, assisted by a foreign bishop, consecrated Keginald to the see of
Bath at the Church of S, Jean de Maurienne. Dicto 581. See also Rog. de
-Hovedon sub anno 1174.
190 Bishops of Old Sarum.
a task had been committed to Bishop Jocelin when he attempted to
remedy them."
The few days that remained to him were spent in a Cistercian
monastery, whither he retired, there to prepare himself, away from
the worry and distractions of his arduous duties, for his departure
hence. His had been a stormy episcopate at the best. He died in
the year 1184, on the 1$th day of November, a day which, for
many centuries afterwards, was observed in the Cathedral, in com-
memoration of him.* There are those who too often misjudge ocr
early bishops, or too readily believe the accusations of their foes. I
like to think, and believe also, that not a few of them, despite of
many difficulties, were true to their Master and his Church; and
amongst them, though so little has been hitherto known about him,
I would fain reckon Jocelin de Bohun.
William de Wanda in his account of the opening of the new
Cathedral, in 1225, tells us that the body of Bishop Jocelin was
then brought from Old Sarum, and reverently deposited in the Lady
Chapel. I can have no doubt that the large effigy of a bishop now
placed near the western entrance of the Cathedral, on the south side
of the nave, clad in his alb, dalmatic, chasuble, and stole, and wearing
his mitre, with the inscription down the centre of the chasuble.
1Tn the decrees of this Synod irregularities both of life and practice are boldly
rebuked. Amongst other matters thought neccessary to be spoken of was the
habit of clerks allowing their hair to grow, who were, though against their own
will, to be shorn by the archdeacon. The testimony of contempories to the low
and depraved condition of the clergy is very saddening. Thus William of
Malmesbury says ‘‘ Nullus dives nisi nummularius, nullus clericus nisi causi-
dicus, nullus presbyter nisi firmarius.” Quoted in Freeman’s Norman
Conquest, v. 135. The character of dignitaries is by no means flattering.
Thus John of Salisbury, who was originally a clerk in the household of Arch-
bishop Thomas a Beckett, and afterwards Bishop of Chartres, (1176,) says of
archdeacons :—‘‘ Erat ut memini genus hominum qui in ecclesia Dei archidia-
conorum consentur nomine, quibus vestra discretio omnem salutis vyiam quere-
batur esse preclusam. Nam diligunt munera, sequuntur retributiones, ad
injurias proni sunt, calumniis gaudent, peccata populi comedunt et bibunt,
quibus vivitur ex rapto, ut non sit hospes ab hospite tutus.” Ep. 156. Giles’
ed. i., 260. See Freeman, v. 495.
2See among the ‘‘ Calendar of Obits,” given by Leland under the head of
«Things excerpted out of the Martyrologe Book at Saresbyre.” Wilts Arch.
Mag., i., 170.
Jocelin, 1142—1184. 191
“ Affer opem, devenies in idem,’—“Give help [7.e., with your
prayers, an equivalent to Orate pro anima}, you will come to the
same,”’—-is his. A mere glance at the well authenticated seal of
Bishop Jocelin, of which Dodsworth gives us an engraving,’ is itself
a strong confirmation. Moreover there are expressions, in the
inscription round the slab, referring to his noble birth, which can
apply only to him.
One other link in the chain of evidence I should like to supply,
The name of the old city is spelt in the inscription not “ Saresberie ”
but “Salesberie.” Now the period of that change—when the L
first of all overlapped and afterwards superseded the R—was towards
the middle and latter part of the twelfth century, in fact about the
time ef Bishop Jocelin’s decease. A solitary coin of Stephen has
the mint mark as Satis.; afterwards, in the time of Henry II.
(that is during Jocelin’s episcopate) the name of the place is com-
monly spelt with an L instead of R. This may seem but a trifle,
and must only go for what it is worth. But to an eye accustomed
in early documents to see the R, in the name Sarisberie (as it is
_ spelt in Domesday), it marks a period, the date of which is easily
ascertained, when that R passes into L. And that period synchron-
a
izes fairly well with the decease of Bishop Jocelin. The inscription,
_ —I quote from Dodsworth—which is in Latin Hexameters, with
frequent rhymes both at the end and in the middle of several verses,
is as follows :—
“ Flent hodie Salesberie quia decidit ensis
Justitia, pater ecclesiz Salesberiensis :
Dum viguit miseros aluit, fastusque potentum
Non timuit, sed clava fuit terrorque nocentum
De Ducibus de nobilibus primordia duxit
Principibus, propeque tibi qui gemma reluxit.”
_ Jt may be freely Englished thus: “They mourn to-day at Sales-
_ berie because there has fallen the sword of justice, the Father of the
Church of Salesberie. Whilst he lived he sustained the oppressed
and wretched, and feared not the arrogance of the powerful, but himself
was the scourge ((it. club) and terror of the guilty. He traced his
‘ancestry from Dukes and noble Princes, who shone near thee as a
precious gem.” [To be Continued.]
1 History of Salisbury Cathedral, p. 196,
192
“Che Wiltshice Acgiment for Wiltshire.”
By W. W. Ravenuitt, Esq., M.A.,
Houorary Secretary of the Wiltshire Society (founded A.D. 1817), Recorder of Andover., &e,
(Read before the Society at Salisbury, August, 1876.)
44 GRQHE Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.’”—Such is the
Wah mandate of the Minister for War. A few notes on the
past history of our regiment, now once more coming to its own
county, will be acceptable to this Society.
Memoirs of early services have been most kindly furnished to me
from the War Office, and by Major-General Ingall, C.B., who for-
merly commanded “ the Wiltshire Springers.” The London Gazette,
the Army List, and current histories have been consulted, but much
no doubt remains to be related upon this interesting subject.
Records written on odd scraps of paper, preserved in regimental
books, carried about on marches through many lands, must have
a hard life; and it may be, that precious matter penned in America
or the Spanish Peninsula, lies beneath the Ganges.
The origin of the Regiment is royal. It was raised in 1736, as a
second battalion of the Fourth Foot, or King’s Own Regiment. The
Fourth was a worthy foster-father. Since 1680, when Thomas
Earl of Plymouth inspected the newly-raised rank and file of that
corps, seventy-six years had been actively spent by it, at home
and abroad.
It had served in Africa, at Tangier, and returned to England.
The Prince of Orange landed at Torbay. The Fourth was the first
regiment to recognize the will of the nation,and greet “ the deliverer.”
Once on the throne, the king showed his eternal gratitude, by naming
the Fourth, “The King’s Own.” It served with distinction at the
taking of Gibraltar (1704), at Barcelona,fatal Almanza, and under the
great Duke of Marlborough. It covered the retreat at Falkirk, and
was conspicuous at Culloden. ‘Tales of gallantry from such sources
“The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.’ 193
must have enlivened the mess-table and camp-fire of the new (2nd)
battalion, stimulated its young life, and brought in recruits for the
then king of the King’s Own—George II.—who was every inch
a soldier.
There was no war actually on at the time, but things had-been
looking rather blacker than usual. On the 8th of February, 1756, the
Colonel of the Twentieth Regiment (James Wolfe), had written: “I
believe the French would be pleased to invade us if they knew how to
get over. My opinion is, that they will try what their fleet can do
first, and if they beat ours, then we may expect a very formidable
attack. We have been rather tardy in providing against their great
power, but I still hope it is not too late. The confidence, or rather
stupidity, of the people of this country surpasses all belief. Secure
in their ignorance and presumption they set the whole force of
France at defiance.”
So thought the future conqueror of Canada, and when “the fine
season called him to business ” he, with his regiment (the Twentieth) ;
commenced recruiting, took up his quarters at Devizes, and set
Wiltshire ablaze.
The site of the old inn at: the back of the Town Hall in that
town, where his colours were posted, must be known to several here.
Recruits eame, drawn by his reputation from many a fight, his
smart little active dapper form, his bright winning eye, and his
known care for his soldiers. Recruits came during June and July
_ and then “The Twentieth ” left Devizes, and by the 4th of August
_ reached a military camp formed near Blandford, the accounts of
_ which read very like those of similar gatherings now-a-days.’
It was during the month of August, 1756, probably, that this
second battalion was added to the 4th Regiment of Foot. Two -
_ years later it was given an independent establishment and numbered
_ “The Sixty-Second.” London Gazette, 9th May, 1758. Whitehall.
_“The king has been pleased to appoint the following lords and
" gentlemen to be officers of the following regiments.” Then
| follow appointments to fifteen new regiments, viz., Sixty-First Foot
nn i ee et ae hy tel
ot 18ee London Gazette; August 21st, 1756,
VOL, XVII.—NO. L, o
ee
194 “ The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
to Seventy-Fifth Foot. Amongst them, Colonel William Strode to be
Colonel of the Sixty-Second Regiment of Foot ; Major John Jennings
to be Lieutenant-Colonel ; and Major Joseph Higginson to be Major
to the said regiment ; and Colonel James Wolfe to be Colonel of the
the Sixty-Seventh Regiment of Foot. There are in the same Gazette
nominations of Lieutenant-Colonel and Major to the Twentieth
(Kingsley’s) Regiment in which Wolfe had hitherto been.
Meanwhile war had come; four companies of the 2nd battalion
of the Fourth were already in America, and had been present at the
siege of Louisberg. In July, 1758, that place had capitulated, and
5637 prisoners were sent to England.
Those four companies—lucky fellows—by this time known as be- —
longing to the Sixty-Second Regiment of Foot, were in the following
year in the victory on the heights of Abraham, when Wolfe and his
army won Quebec, apparently forming part of Colonel Howe’s Light
Brigade; but as the numbers of the regiments are not given in
despatches, I have found it impossible to trace them.
Few events in military history are more replete with interest, or
adventure, than this; how Wolfe, with the assistance of Rear
Admiral Holmes, reconnoitred, planned and checkmated Montcalm,
disposing his forces so as to meet on the cliffs, and then in the dead
of night embarking with his men in boats and dropping down the river
past picket and battery to the rendezvous.
The boats as they were filled with troops, were ranged in line, the
light infantry in the van, the other corps by seniority. At two o’clock, :
all being on board, the signal was given to start, General Wolfe being
in the leading boat. The night, though still, was very dark—and -
it is said that those close to Wolfe could hear him whispering Gray’s
Elegy :—
‘‘ The boast of heraldry, the pomp of power,
And all that beauty, all that wealth e’er gaye,
Await alike the inevitable hour ;
The paths of glory lead but to the grave,”
As he finished he said, “‘ I would rather be the author of that piece -
than take Quebec.” But this other life or the recollections of his
lady love, whose portrait he had entrusted that night to the future
By W. W. Ravenhill, Esq. 195
Lord St. Vincent, did not for one moment divert him from the
business in hand. Then followed the landing, and though the Light
Brigade were carried somewhat down the stream, yet hoodwinking the
sentry (“La France””—“ A quel régiment? ”—“ De la Reine”’), they
managed to get halfway up the cliffs before they were discovered and
fired on; grasping stumps, boughs, anything, or pushing up the one
narrow path, they gained the summit, and the position was taken.
The morning of the 13th of September, 1759, dawned. Wolfe had
his troops in order of battle, and the French General, thus surprised,
knew he must fight and did so. By 10 a.m. the issue was decided.
The French were driven back on Quebec, with heavy loss; the Can-
adians fled. Wolfe, thrice wounded, was desiring those near him to
hold him up, “that his brave soldiers should not see him drop.”
Then his memorable words, “ The day is ours, keep it.” After that,
as he was dying, “ They run, Sir, they run,” said one by his side.
“Who? Who run?” “ The enemy, Sir, they give way everywhere! ””
One last command for Burton to cut them off, and then “ Now God
be praised ; I die in peace!”’ The victory was his—and he knew it.
He slept calmly in death, poor Kate Lowther! poor England! The
envied of all true soldiers, he was but thirty-three ! !
The remnant of the four companies of the Sixty-Second, with the
recollections of this glorious campaign fresh upon them, returned
to England and received the thanks of the nation. After obtaining
some recruits, they were sent to Ireland.
1760, February 21st. Ireland invaded by M. Thurot, a successful
privateersman, four French ships of war, and 1200 men. It will be
remembered, that he was sent to divert attention from Mons.
Confleur and his fleet in their invasion of England. The latter
had been already defeated, when Thurot, ignorant of this, landed
with his soldiers at Carrickfergus and attacked that town. The
castle, its only means of defence, was a ruinous building, then gar-
_ risoned by Lieutenant-Colonel Jennings and four companies (about
47am under much obligation to Wright’s Life of Wolfe for the above sketch.
A piece of plate, made up of smaller pieces, belonging to the Wolfes came to the
_ Sotherons, their cousins. This has descended to Mr. George Sotheron Estcourt,
_M.P. for North Wilts. 1
02
196 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
one hundred and thirty men) of the Sixty-second, who were for the
most part recruits.’ The fighting commenced and lasted several hours,
during which the works were repaired as far as possible, but were
quite untenable for so small and undisciplined a force against such
overwhelming numbers. Moreover the ammunition hadrun short, still
the little garrison from the onsct, disputed the possession of the town
from house to house, with pertinacity. Whilst this shifting struggle
was at its height, a young child, heedless of danger, ran in play
between the French and English forees; a Frenchman grounded his
piece, advanced between the lines of fire, and carried the human waif
to a place of safety, then rejoined the ranks and went on fighting.
The four companies were at last compelled to retreat imto the
castle, but they did not capitulate, till they had spent all their
ammunition, at last even firimg their coat buttons. They were
afterwards permitted to march out with the honours of war ona
promise to remain in Ireland, as prisoners on parole, till exchanged.
Thurot re-embarked, was pursued, defeated, and slain, on the 28th
of February; and this invasion—the last ever effected on this
country—was at an end.
Lieut.-Col. Jennings and the Sixty-Second Regiment, received the
thanks of the Irish House of Commons, for their spirited behaviour,
and gallant defence of Carrickfergus. There is a tradition that it
was from firing their buttons on this occasion, that the regimental
button has a ball on it.’
Passing over sixteen years of uneventful service in Ireland, the
West Indies, and again Ireland, the regiment was ordered to Canada.
It was 1776, the Provinces of North America had revolted.
General Burgoyne, the man about town, poet and courtier, had been
sent to displace Carleton, (Wolfe’s old friend,) in the command of
part of the forces in that country. The “Sixty-Second ” belonged to
this division, and they served the campaign, which closed at Saratoga,
on the 15th of October, 1776, when three thousand four hundred
1 Smollett, 4 Hist. of Eng., 361.
2 Appendix. See War Office Papers, and Hozier’s Invasions of England,
By W. W. Ravenhill, Esq. 197
English and Germans surrendered to General Gates and about
thirteen thousand New Englanders.'
The English had lost heavily in the skirmishes which immediately
preceded ; and they had suffered from exposure and starvation, amidst
the woods and swamps. The havoc was fearful, a fight for life, and
ever in the thick with their “light springing footstep” were the Sixty-
Second. “ Here they come, ‘The Springers!’ Nothing stops them.”
And so they won their name—“ Tue Sprinerrs.” The regiment had
left Canada five hundred strong, there remained but sixty men and.
five officers at the close of this bloody campaign. ‘Tell my uncle
I died like a soldier,” were the last and happy words of young
Lieutenant Harvey, one of those who fell near Saratoga, at the age
of sixteen.
_ These sixty-five heroes rested as prisoners of war three years and
then returned to England. In 1780 the regiment was quartered at
Lincoln, in 1782 at Newark, and the flank companies were (perhaps
in honour of Saratoga) detached to Windsor “ to do duty over His
Majesty.”
From the latter year (1782) the regiment bears the name
“ Wirtsnire.”* County titles were then by order of the Commander
in Chief allotted to several regiments, thus establishing a local
connection with the various counties, after which they were desig-
nated ; this was done to improve recruiting. The Sixty-Second was
ealled “the Wiltshire,” and was in the following year ordered to
Trowbridge. To-day once more this notion of localisation is revived,
let us hope, for our permanent welfare.
_ The Wiltshire Regiment did not remain long at Trowbridge at
that time however, and then it was moved to Scotland and Ireland.
Ten years, 1780—1790, of home service were followed by eight
years, 1790—1798, abroad. Between 1793 and 1796 the regiment
was increased from five hundred and seventy to eight hundred and
fifty, and afterwards to one thousand men.
12 Massey Hist. Eng. 341.
2 See Bancroft’s Hist. of America, youl. 3.
3 W. O. Papers,
198 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
Sent to the West Indies nearly all died there on service or
by disease, and a scanty remnant returned home in 1798. During
their absence an important matter had been carried out for their
comfort and permanent establishment, rather however,for the moment
at any rate, breaking up local connections. In 1792 it was de-
termined to build regular quarters for the army in various parts of the
country. Before that period soldiers had been quartered by billets—a
practice which had caused much heart-burning and many Acts of
Parliament. Indeed innkeepers were so overwhelmed by their
military guests, that they often closed their houses and fled with
their valuables. But from that year, dates the commencement of
the great changes, in the position and welfare of the soldier, which
barracks bring with them.
The Wiltshire Springers recruited again on their return to England,
chiefly in Devon and Cornwall. In the following year (1799) it
was determined to add a second battalion to the regiment, and
thirteen hundred men came to them from the militia whilst they
were at Poole, Dorset. The two battalions thus obtained a strength
of eight hundred each. Orders were received whilst there for them
to go to Holland, but these were countermanded, and the regiment
went to soothe Irish troubles. Subsequently it volunteered for Egypt,
and received the thanks of His Royal Highness the Commander in
Chief for so doing. Shortly after (such was the uncertainty of
military existence) the second hatallion was reduced, but two years
later was raised once more —at Devizes, in 1804—and hence comes
another bond of union of the ‘ Wiltshire Regiment” with the
county of Wilts. The first battalion of the reconstructed corps
served in the Mediterranean and in Egypt, 1807—1812, with some
success against Murat and others.’ (See Appendiz, Nos. 2, 3, and 4.)
But the first honours of the regiment, now recognised on the
colours, &c. (Nive), were reserved for the second battalion. On the
6th October, 1813, the latter landed at Passage, in the north-
west of Spain, and joining Lord Aylmer’s brigade of Guards * were
1 It is impossible to follow the regiments in the despatches.
2 Lord Aylmer’s brigade was originally intended to reduce Santona. 11
Alison, 131,
By W. W. Ravenhill, Esq. 199
present at the brilliant campaign on the Nivelle and Nive, in
which Wellington defeated Soult, and pressing that ‘“ Marshal
Plunderer ” back, invaded France.
The action, in which the Sixty-Second won honour, was on the
10th of December.'. The British and allied army were divided by
the River Nive. Soult, having command of a bridge above them,
determined to crush one half of it, before the other half could cross.
The attack was unexpected. When it began (9 a.m.) Lord
Aylmer’s brigade were at St. Jean de Luz, six miles in the rear.
. The Portugese were at this time in the front of the allies at this
portion of the lines, The French drove them back on Robinson’s
English brigade, which stood firm. A hot fight ensued in the
hedges, the French pressing on with their wonted dash. But
Robinson was obstinate, and he was joined by that grand hero
Sir John Hope. There was no moving them then, but the French
forces were increasmg. Ho for Aylmer’s brigade! They were
there before they were expected. Six miles at the double, breathless
but in at them. Well done Lord Aylmer! ‘Well done Guards!
Well done Wiltshire Springers! The French were compelled to
retire. Though in the thick of it apparently, and having to fight
hard, the Wiltshiremen were lucky in casualties—four rank and file
wounded. The second battalion remained at Bayonne till August,
1814, and then returned to Ireland.
For these services the regiment received medal and clasps. The
words “Nive” and “Peninsula” were afterwards added to the
colours in 1829.
_ When Waterloo was fought the second battalion of the regiment
was in Ireland, but afterwards went to Paris in July, 1815, to form
a part of the army of oceupation; they were quartered at Mont
Martre and Belleville. Here they remained till January, 1816, and
then returned to Ireland.
On their way a melancholy event happened.
‘On the evening of the same day upon which the dreadful catastrophe |
took place in the Bay of Tramore (where three hundred and sixty-three persons
belonging to the Fifty-Ninth Regiment lost their lives on board the Sea Horse)
_ an accident happened to a detachment of the Sixty-Second Regiment which had
? Alison, xi. yol., 142.
200 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
embarked in January, 1816, on board the Lord Melville, bound for Kinsale ; but
owing to the atmosphere being so thick and hazy and a heavy gale springing up,
in the attempt to run the vessel into Kinsale harbour it was driven by the
violence of the tempest upon a bed of rocks. The sea breaking into the cabin,
together with the continual dashing on the rocks, a boat was manned for the
ladies on board to endeavour making the shore. Two officers’ wives with their
servants, soldiers of the.Fifty-Ninth Regiment, six of the crew together with
Captain Radford, of the Sixty-Second Regiment (who was in a weak state of
health), got into the boat and made for the shore ; but distressing to add, they
had not reached half-way, when the boat was swamped, and, with the exception
of one sailor, all perished.” *
The battalion proceeded to Fermoy from whence it marched to
Dublin, and was broken up on the 24th of February, 1816. Four
hundred of them were sent to complete the first battalion then at
Halifax, Nova Scotia. After a service of five years in North
America, this first battalion returned to Portsmouth, and went soon
after to Ireland.
In 1825 the Regiment was augmented to ten companies of seventy-
four rank and file. Five years in Ireland; then to Madras and
Bangalore.
In 1881 the regiment received the thanks of the Major-General
commanding and the Government, for their services at Bangalore in
India.
1838. Stillin India. Cholera on march to Masulipatam. Moved
in 1834 to Moulmein.
1839. Establishment in India increased to one thousand and
forty. Moving about India.
In 1842, on the 6th September, at 2 in the early morning whilst
the regiment was going up the Ganges, from Calcutta to Dinapore,
a violent hurricane fell on it near Sickree Gullee Newgong Rocks.
The officers and men with their wives and families, were asleep on
the vessels, in which they were making their journey, moored to
the river bank for the night. Many of the little fleet were soon
swamped, and two officers (Lieutenants Seobell and Gason), five
sergeants, four corporals, thirty-four privates, six women and twelve
children—sixty-three in all—were drowned. The colonel of the
regiment (now General Sir Thomas Reed) was with Lady Reed ina
pinnace,which was driven from its moorings,and then floated down the
* W. O. Doc., lady’s Landwriting,
By W. W. Ravenhili, Esq. 201
stream, heeling over in a frightful manner. The inmates contrived
to get through the after cabin windows on to the sides of the
ship. In this dangerous position they remained for three hours,
holding on they scarce knew how, the boat rolling from side to
side, sometimes floating completely bottom up. Had she righted
she would probably have gone down; such was the violence of the
storm. The people on the banks either could not, or would not
assist them. What an awful night adventure for ladies! At day-
break those on board discovered the dingy still attached ; by partially
baling her out they managed to get into her, and when opposite
Rajmahal were rescued. The pinnace however sank with the colours
of the regiment. After six months the latter were recovered from the
bottom of the river ; tattered and worn they now hang in Salisbury
Cathedral, a fitting votive memento not merely of our Wiltshire
soldiers, but of that awful wrath of weather and that merciful de-
liverance.
A little more than three years and, on the 20th December, 1845,
the Wiltshire regiment was part of a garrison of six thousand holding
Ferozepore, under Sir J. Littler, against the Sikhs who were ten
times their number. The enemy had crossed the Sutlej, and the
force with which Sir H. Harding and Sir H. Gough were coming to
their rescue, was about eleven thousand. Orders came that night
to Ferozepore that the garrison there was to retire from their
position, risk a flank march and join the main army. At 8, a.m.,
next morning they started, and, strange to say, effected a junction
about 4, p.m., in the afternoon of the same day, without opposition.
They were at once ordered to the left front of the British and
Native army, then drawn up ready to attack the Sikhs.
‘The enemy, thirty thousand strong, were in a large entrenched
camp, the approach to which was protected by guns of a heavy calibre.
Littler’s division formed part of the left attack, and the men, exhausted
by their march, found themselves in action immediately. Two-
thirds of the Sixty-Second regiment were slaughtered before the
entrenchments, and “ the men,” says Lord Gough, in general order,
“did not desist from their noble efforts until ordered by the Brigadier
commanding (General Reed) to fall back. . . . The conduct
202 “ The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
of the regiment has received and merits his Excellency’s most
cordial approval. The very heavy fire by which the regiment was
assailed, and its steady devoted gailantry under the storm, are best
attested by the fact of which his Excellency was an eyewitness, of
the space in front of and close to the enemy’s battery, having been
thickly strewed with the bodies of brave officers and soldiers who
fell in the assault. The Commander in Chief finds that seventeen
officers and one hundred and eighty-five men fell on this occasion.”
But though the left of the army were thus checked by the murder-
ous fire and the difficult nature of the ground, some of the right
managed to rush within the Sikh lines, and darkness fell on the
combatants mingled in a struggle of life and death, a ghastly
assemblage. The Sikhs were still unconquered, with thirty thousand
fresh troops not far off. But nothing further could be attempted till
the morrow. “Itis my duty to tell you,” said Gough to Harding,
“that the army is in a critical position. What do you recommend
to be done?” “ Wait till daylight, attack the enemy vigorously,
beat him, or die on the field’ “ Agreed,” said Gough, and they
parted. In the morning the Commander in Chief finding the Sikh
guns overwhelming, ordered a bayonet charge. They won; and
so ‘ Ferozeshah” was written on the colours of the Wiltshire
Regiment.
London Gazette. February 23rd, 1846 :—
1846. Dec. 21st and 22nd.
‘ FEROZzESHAH.
4th Infantry Diy., 7th Brig.
62nd. Captain G. H. Clarke; killed, Captain H. Wells, ditto, Lieut. T. K,
Scott, ditto; Lieut. W. Me.’ Nair, ditto; Lieut. R. Gubbing, ditto; Lieut. M,
Kelly, ditto; Lieut. & Adjutant G. Sims, ditto. Major W. T. Shortt, slightly
wounded ; Captain W. 8. Graves, badly ditto; Capt. C. W. Sibley, ditto; Capt.
D. G. A. Darroch, slightly ditto; Lieut. M. J. Gregorson badly ditto; Lieut.
W. L. Ingall, slightly ditto; Lieut. A. 8S. Craig, severely ditto; Ensign C,
Roberts, ditto; Ensign J. M. M. Hewett, slightly ditto.
Seven officers, six sergeants, seventy-six rank and file, one officer’s charger
killed. Ten officers, five sergeants, two drummers, one hundred and fifty-
four rank and file wounded.
December 25th, 1845.”
London Gazette. April 3rd, 1846 :—
“ War Office, 3rd April, 1846. .
-Further list of non-eommisioned officers, drummers, and privates killedin « —
By W. W. Ravenhill, Esq. 203
action at Ferozeshah on the 21st December, 1848, or who subsequently died of
wounds :—
Sixty-Second Regiment.
Sergeants.
Cahill, John
Dougherty, David
Fox, Samuel
Corporals.
Cobbe, Jeremiah
Cole, Jonathan
Fawcett, James
Gordon, James Phipps, Daniel
Hicks, John Swift, Joho
Houlden, Thomas —
Slim, John Drummer.
Barrett, James
Bass, William
Biles, Charles
Bradley, Richard
Brennen, Peter
Brereton, James
- Buckley, Thomas
Bush, Alexander
_ Byrne, Michael
~Cunnington, Josiah
Cazesley, William
Christian, Thomas
Coltman, Henry
Conolly, John
Connor, Daniel
Corcoran, Nicholas
. Patrick
Cotterill, James
Srosby, Alexander
Cyples, Edward
Dakers, John
Davey, John
Delany, Patrick
an, Edward
Essecks, Samuel
freeman, William
Gibson, James
Graham, Alexander
Herbert, Henry
Hobin, Edward
Hogg, Henry
Millis, Thomas
Privates.
Jackson, M. John
Keally, Patrick
Kelly, David
James
John
Thomas
Lawn, Edward
Little, John
Lochend, Samuel
Lowe, Richard
M’Alister, John
Me. Allister, Michael
Norris, Jesse
O Brien, Michael
Palmer, Richard
Parbridgs, William
Parker, John
Powell, George
Pye, James
Rielly, Edmund
Rumble, John
Shantey, John
Smyth, Michael
Stapelton, W. N.
Stewart, James
Taylor, William
Thorn, George, 22nd De-
George [cember
Tomlinson, John
Turner, Abraham
Twigg, Joseph
Wall, Henry
Ward, Robert
Webster, John
White, William
Wilkins, James
Wilton, John
Witt, John
Young, George
Died of Wounds, -
Corporal.
Runyard, Thomas, 3rd
January, 1846
Drummer,
King, T., 19th January,
1846
Privates,
Batson, E., 1st January,
1846.
Crosston, W., 7th Jan.,
1846
Dee, T., 9th January,
1846
Dilmore, John, 26th De-
cember, 1845
Fleet, John, 27th De-
cember, 1845
Jordan, James, 28th De-
cember, 1845
Sarson, G., 26th January
1846
Smith, William, of Not-
tingham, 31st Decem-
ber, 1845
Ward, T., 10th January,
1846. :
Wright,J., 26th January,
1846,
204 The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
“The Sixty-Second did all that brave men could at Ferozeshah,”
said the late Duke of Wellington.
But there was much yet to be done against the Sikhs, and the
morning of the 10th of February, 1846, found the remnant of the
Sixty-Second at Sobraon, on the bank of the river Sutlej. There again
the British army and their Indian allies were opposed to a murderous
fire from behind strong entrenchments. Here is Sir H. Gough’s
account of it: “The English left, two brigades commanded by Sir
Robert Dick, rested on the river, opposite to the extreme right of the
enemy. They consisted of the Tenth Foot, and Fifty-Third Foot (7th
brigade) under Brigadier Stacey; and at two hundred yards’ distance, .
the 6th brigade, under Brigadier Wilkinson. In reserve was the
5th Brigade, under Brigadier Hon. T. Ashburnham, consisting of
the Ninth Foot, Sixty-Second Foot, and Twenty-Sixth Bengal
Native Infantry.” In the centre was Major-General Gilbert’s
Division. Then more to the right Brigadier Campbell’s men, and
still further Sir Harry Smith’s, protected by reserves, under the
command of Major-General Sir Joseph Thackwell and Brigadier
Scott. The battle opened with a spirited artillery fire, soon after
6, am. But this was not enough; there must be the musket
and the bayonet. Stacey’s Brigade charged about 9, a.m., and
though shaken by the fire got in and drove the Sikhs before them.
The Tenth greatly distinguished themselves, not firing till within
the entrenchments. The Fifty-Third Foot, and the Forty-Third and
Fifty-Ninth Native Infantry were also in good fighting trim.
Ashburnham’s Brigade moved to support with the other troops at the
instant this happened. “ As these attacks,’ says Sir H. Gough,
“of the centre and right commenced the fire of our heavy guns had
first to be directed to the right and then gradually to cease; but at
one time the thunder of full one hundred and twenty pieces of
ordnance reverberated in this mighty combat through the valley of
the Sutlej; and as it was soon seen that the weight of the whole
force (thirty thousand) within the Sikh camp was likely to be thrown
upon the two brigades that had passed its trenches, it became
necessary to convert into close and serious attacks the demonstrations —
with skirmishers and artillery of the centre and right; and the
By W..W. Ravenhill, Esq. 205
battle raged with inconceivable fury from right to left. The Sikhs,
even when at particular points their entrenchments were mastered
with the bayonet, strove to regain them by the fiercest conflict
sword in hand. Nor was it until the cavalry of the left, under
Major-General Sir Joseph Thackwell, had moved forward and ridden
through the openings in the entrenchments made by our sappers in
single file, and re-formed as they passed them ; and the 3rd Dragoons
—whom no obstacle usually held formidable by horse appears to
eheck—had on this day, as at Ferozeshah, galloped over and cut
_ down the obstinate defenders of batteries and field-works ; and until
the full weight of three divisions of infantry, with every field artillery
- gun which could be sent to their aid, had been cast into the scale,
that victory finally declared for the British. The fire of the Sikhs
first slackened, and then nearly ceased ; and the victors then pressing
them in masses over their bridge, and into the Sutlej, which a
sudden rise of seven inches had rendered hardly fordable. In their
efforts to reach the right bank through the deepened water, they
suffered from our horse artillery a terrible carnage. Hundreds fell
under this cannonade; hundreds upon hundreds were drowned in
_ attempting the perilous passage. Their awful slaughter, confusion
_ and dismay were such as would have excited compassion in the
hearts of their generous conquerors, if the Khalsa troops (the Sikhs)
had not, in the earlier part of the action, sullied their gallantry by
slaughtering and barbarously mangling every wounded soldier,
whom, in the vicissitudes of attack, the fortune of war left at their
mercy. I must pause in this narrative especially to notice the de-
termined hardihood and bravery with which our two battalions of
Ghoorkas, the Sirmoor and the Nussceree, met the Sikhs, wherever
‘they were opposed to them. Soldiers of small stature but in-
domitable spirit, they vied in ardent courage in the charge with the
_ Grenadiers of our own nation, and armed with the short weapon of
eir mountains were a terror to the Sikhs throughout this great
eomba .” The battle was over by 11 in the morning, and the
Khalsa bridge burnt.
_ In mentioning the services of the various officers, Sir H. Gough
82 ys, “* Brigadier the Hon. T, Ashburnham maneuvred with great:
206 “ The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
coolness and suceess, as a reserve to Brigadiers Stacey and Wilkin-
son’s Brigades;” and in acknowledging the services of those who
commanded regiments, troops, and battalions, etc., in the action, he
mentions Major Shortt, of the Sixty-Second Foot.
Great valour was shewn by a little Ghoorka soldier, who, lifted
upon the shoulders of a man of the Tenth, was the first to enter the
enemy’scamp. The Sikhs lost about ten thousand men. Total British
loss, two thousand three hundred and eighty-three. European
officers, thirteen killed, including Major-General Sir R. Dick, who
had served in the Peninsula and at Waterloo. One hundred and
one wounded. :
‘“¢ Sixty-Second Regiment, in 3rd Infantry Division. Lieutenant W. T. Bart-
ley, killed. Lieutenant R. W. Haviland, wounded severely. One European
officer and three rank and file killed, and three sergeants and forty rank and
file wounded.” [General Sir H. Gough’s despatch, London Gazette, extra-
ordinary, 1st April, 1846.]
Five days after the Sikhs sued for peace.
Afterwards came the distribution of the honours for the successes
of the Sikh campaign. Sir H. Hardinge a Viscount. Sir Hugh
Gough a Baron. Sir Henry G. Smith, G.C.B., &c.
London Gazette,
Downing Street, April 3rd, 1846.
The Queen has been pleased to appoint the following officers to be Companions
of the Most Honourable Military Order of the Bath : Colonel Thomas Reed,
62nd Foot; Colonel The Honourable Thomas Ashburnham, Sixty-Second Foot ;
and nine others, including Captain Hope, of H.M. Frigate Firebrand.”
General Order of Governor General, February 23rd, 1846 :—
‘‘Camp Lahore twelve month’s batta.”
1846. London Gazette, May 8th, p. 1683 :—
How some of the vacant commissions were filled :—
‘‘Sixty-Second Foot. Major George Sheaffe Montezambert, from Forty-first
Foot, to be Major, vice Astier, who exchanges. Dated May 8th, 1846, Ensign
John McKay M’ Kensie, from Fifty-Third Foot, to be Lieutenant, without
purchase, vice Bartley, killed in action. Dated 11th February, 1846,”
Ditto, June 9th, p. 21389 :—
‘‘Sixty-Second Foot. Ensign John Richard Sherlock Fitzgerald, from
Thirty--Ninth Foot, to be Lieutenant, without purchase, vice Richards, deceased.
Dated 11th February, 1846.”
By W. W. Ravenhill, Esq. ’ 207
. Ditto, June 19th, 1846 :—
‘‘ Brevet. To be Majors in the Army: Captains William Matthias, Sixty-
Second Foot, (and seven others from different regiments.)”
Captain Matthias had been mentioned in despatch of Sir H. G.
Smith, giving a report of the battle of Aliwal, dated Camp Feroze-
pore, February 2nd, 1846 :—
“Captain Matthias, of H.M. Sixty-Second, in charge of a detachment of con-
valescents, of Her Majesty’s Service, and Lieut Hibbert, of the Hon. Company's
Sappers and Miners, readily performed the duty assigned to them of protecting
the 8-inch howitzers.”
Ditto, June 23rd, 1846 :—
‘The following further list of uon-commisioned officers and privates of the
Queen’s Army killed in the recent battles on tha Sutlej, or who have subse-
quently died of wounds received in those actions.
Sixty-Second Foot.
Amor, George Daniels, Henry Orrell, Edward
_ Askew, John Farmer, Peter Runyan, Thomas
_ Aldridge, William Hardman, Edmund Redmond, Thomas
Batsor, Edward Irwin, David Roberts, John
Britt, Thomas King, Joseph Ryan, Patrick
Croston, William Lannon, Thomas Sarson, G.
_ Dee, Thomas Lonnon, Edward Stammers, Samuel
~ Down, Alexander Maxwell, John Ward, Thomas
Dowd, Michael Newman, Thomas _ Wright, John
© Sobraon ” added to the colours of the Wiltshire Regiment.
_ The remnant of the Wiltshire regiment, some months later, started
for the south, to meet a new danger. The following extract from
_ adespatch of Lord Gough’s (March 20th, 1847), best tells the tale :—
* ‘Between twelve and one o’clock, p.m., on the 2nd March, 1847, the boat in”
which Lieutenant-Colonel Shortt, commanding the Sixty-Second Regiment, was
proceeding down the Ganges to Calcutta, suddenly burst into flames, and the.
__ whole of the property on board belonging to the Lieutenant-Colorel, Captains
_ Olpherts and Graves, was destroyed, together with the cotours of the Srxrr-
Second, which were fastened to the inside of the thatch roof of the boat. All.
efforts to preserve the colours proved unavailing in consequence of the inflammable
"nature of the material to which they were attached and the violence of the gale
at the time of the occurrence. The accident was supposed to have originated ‘
from some fire having been carelessly dropped on the roof by one of the crew,_
and only a few seconds elapsed from the alarm being given before the boat was
_ enveloped in flames, leaving the officers barely time to jump overboard.” *
- # W. O. Papers,
208 “ The Wiltshire Regiment for Wilshire”
It is remarkable that this terrible disaster happened only three or
four miles from the spot where the colours now in Salisbury Cathe-
dral were immersed.
The memorial window of the Regiment in Salisbury Cathedral
contains the initials of the names of the officers, who died on the
Sutlej, and in the Crimea.
_ Passing over rather more than seven years, (during which period
the regiment returned to Europe,) we find the Sixty-Second leaving
Malta for the Crimea, in November, 1854—the head-quarters and
four companies in “ Zhe Miranda” (Nov. 5th) and two companies
in “ The Jura” (Nov. 8th.) The head-quarters landed at Kamiesch
Bay two days before the great storm of the 14th of November, 1854,
and weathered that tornado in camp onshore. Their messmates
were still on the Jura. The Sixty-Second was the only British
_ regiment that landed at Kamiesch. It had its full share of trench-
work, and thus suffered heavily.
The greatest loss it sustained at one time was on the 8th of
June, 1855, having been engaged in the assault and capture of the
Quarries on the preceding night, it was retained as a working and
covering party during that day. Major Dickson, of the Sixty-Second,
was killed at daybreak on the 8th, in repelling the last Russian attack
of that period. About 8 a.m. the same morning a round shot, fired
from the Bastion Du Mat, first struck Captain, now General Ingall,
C.B. and carried away part of his thigh, then killed Lieutenant-Colonel
Shearman, Captain Forster,and five others, two of them Sixty-Second
men and wounded about eleven men besides, some belonging to the
Sixty-Second, and others to other regiments, who chanced to be mixed
up with them. James Turner,a Wiltshireman of the Sixty-Second,
since a sergeant of pensioners, who lives near Devizes, was amongst
the latter.
But fearful slaughter yet remained for the regiment. At the
storming of the Redan (the 8th of September, 1855) the Sixty-Second
Regiment, says Dr. Russell! “ went into action two hundred and
a
1 Expedition to Crimea, p. 460.
Appendix, 209
forty-five of all ranks. They were formed into two companies, with
four officers to each, together with the Colonel, Major, Adjutant, and
Acting Assistant Surgeon O’Callaghan, and formed part of the
storming party. Colonel Tylee was hit in the hand crossing the
open space in front of the Redan, and obliged to retire. Lieutenant
Blakeston was shot in getting through an embrasure of the Redan,
Lieutenant Dayenport was shot through the nose. On the parapet
two officers were killed or died of their wounds, and four officers
were wounded out of a total of eleven; three sergeants were killed
and four wounded out of a total of sixteen; one drummer killed out
of eight ; fourteen rank and file were killed and seventy-five wounded
out of two hundred and ten.” ‘ Such,” he adds, “ was this heavy
day.”
The Sixty-Second was with the Thirtieth and Fifty-Fifth, The
last-mentioned regiments also suffered terribly.
Peace with Russia followed in 1856, and the Sixty-Second has
since been doing duty in many places, and is now (1876) in India,
There are a considerable number of Wiltshiremen in it—almost
it is said amounting to one-half—for the Wiltshire Militia (Colonel
Lord Methuen) has sent a great many recruits.
Henceforth more than ever it should be Wiltshire for the Wiltshire
Regiment.
——
APPENDIX.—No. I.?
Army List, 10th February, 1814, p. 290 :—
Sixty-Second [or the Wiltshire] Regiment of Foot.
Colonel Samuel Hulse 25th June, 1810 | Gen. 25th Sept.,1803
, Trevor Hull 6th Sept., 1798 | M.Gen.4th June,1811
7: William Doyle 16th Aug., 1804 | M.Gen.4thJune,1811
eee colonels George Gauntlett 2nd May, 1811
* { Nathaniel Blackwell 13th June 4th April, 1808
David Ximenes 28th Aug. 1804 | Lt.-Col.4thJune,1811
? Daniel Francis Blowart, 12th Oct. Lt.-Col.25thAp.,1808
Majors John F, Goodridge _ Ist Feb., 1810] 25th Oct., 1809
Edward Darley 2nd May, 1811} Lt. 7Cal. 1st.Jan.,1812
* This list is printed here to promote enquiry as to what was the Wiltshire
element of the regiment in 1814; it is the earliest in the British Museum
Library.
YOL. XV1I.—NO. L. z
210 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
‘ Richard Robarts
Eyre Smyth
William Hull
81st Jan., 1799 | Major, 4th June, 1811
27th Nov. 1801 | Major, 4th June, 1813
25th June, 1803
William Riddell 28rd July
James Butler 2nd Aug., 1804
John Pollock 27th ditto
Paulus Aimilius Irving 19th Sept.
Skene Keith 19th Oct.
Richard Edwards 1st Dee.
James Sweeney 31st Jan., 1805
Caveats C: W: Kerr 22nd Aug.
Henry Kater 13th Oct., 1808
William Hartley 22nd Dec.
Andrew Creagh 2\st Sept., 1809 1 Mar, 1809
William Johnstone 1st Feb., 1810
Henry Lewis E. Gwynne 23rd Aug.
William Hodgkinson 2nd May, 1811
John Walter 24th Mar., 1813
John Reed 25th ditto
Richard Bates 29th July 21st July, 1810
Isaac Humphries 21st Oct.
James Fielding Sweeney 22nd ditto
John Radford 27th Mar., 1805
Robert Martin 28th ditto Adjutant
Edward Chichester Bolton 1st April
Edward Dawson 2nd ditto
Richard Wood 3rd ditto
Charles Nangle 18th ditto
William Lowe Peard 1st Aug.
Roger Sweeney 19th Dec., 1805
John Mahon 3rd April, 1806
James Twigg 1st May
Richard Usher 17th July
Francis Van Hemert 16th April,1807
Lieutenants William Bellingham 27th Aug.
John Shearman 1st Nov. 27th Noy. 1806
Sackville H. Eaton 3rd ditto
Christopher Heyland th ditto
Edward Parker 6th ditto Adjutant
John Keith 7th ditto
Alexander Thompson 8th ditto
James Butler 9th Nov. 1807
Alexander Scott 12th ditto
Philip Ricketts 25th Mar., 1808
A. Stewart 29th Sept.
William Pollock
James Dennis
8th June, 1809 | 4th Jan., 1808
15th ditto
Appendix. 211
Frederick Spiller 1st Feb., 1810
Frederick Poole 19th Sept., 1811
| Wilkiam Hodgkinson 26th Dec.
Charles Aug. de Ruvyne 6th Feb., 1812.
Lloyd Henry de Ruvyne 5th March
William Blakeley = 15th Oct,
Lieutenants Wiiliam Dundee 29th April,1813
John 0’ Grady 22nd Sept.
Macarty Colclough 23rd ditto
Thomas Humfrey 21st Oct.
William Hewat 22nd ditto
James Fraser M’Donell 23rd ditto
Walter Strong. 24th ditto
George Kay 6th Feb., 1812.
T. G. Elrington 5th Mar.
David Davies 4th June
Alfred Knight 18th ditto
Rob. Gumbleton Daunt 10th Sept.
Ralph Evans 24th ditto
John Sumners: 4th Nov.
; John Hawkins 5th ditto
Ensigns Alexander Reid 14th Jan., 1813.
Henry Cuffe 8th April
Henry Law 29th ditto
William Kirkpatrick 2nd Sept.
Henry Williams 21st October :
John Judge 22nd ditto
George Lloyd 23rd ditto
Francis Leatham 4th Noy.
Mneas Me. Goldrich 11th Nov.
———
APPENDIX.—No. II.
War Office Papers. No. I.
Halifax, (N.S.)
26th March, 1823.
Sir,
In obedience to His Royal Highness the Commander in Chief’s com-
mands signified to me in your letter bearing date 6th November, 1822, I have
now the honor to transmit the statements required thereby, made up with as
much care and attention as the records of the Sixty-Second Regiment under my
_ command enabled me to do.
: I have the honor to be, Sir,
Your most obedient humble Servant,
: D. XIMENEs,
_ The Adjutant-General of the Forces, Major Sixty-Second Reg., Lieut.-Col.
Horse Guards, London.
P 2.
212 “The Wiltshire. Regiment for Wiltshire.”
.
Srxty-Seconp REGIMENT.
ist. The Sixty-Second Regiment was raised in 1756, and added as a second
battalion to the Fourth Kegiment, and from 21st April, 1758, it was num-
beredthe Sixty-Second, and the command of it was conferred on Colonel
William Strode.
2nd. The regiment was sent to Canada in 1759, from whence, after the cam-
paign, it returned to Ireland in 1760. J
In 1763 the Regiment was sent to the West Indies and stationed at
Dominica; it returned to Ireland in June, 1769, where it remained till
June, 1776, when it was sent to Canada, and served under Sir Guy Carleton
and General Burgoyne, until the convention of Saratoga, in October, 1777.
The Regiment remained prisoners of war from October, 1777, till Novem-
ber, 1780, when it returned to England. It went to Scotland in February,
1784, and was sent to Ireland in October of the same year, from whence
it embarked for Nova Scotia in May, 1790, but on arrival at Halifax was
directed to proceed to Jamaica, where it arrived in the month of July.
The regiment returned to England from the West Indies in May, 1797.
A second battalion was added to it in October, 1799, and both were sent
to Ireland in May, 1800. The following year, being limited to European
service, they volunteered to join ‘the army in Egypt, under Sir Ralph
Abercromby. The second battalion was reduced at the peace, in July,
1802, and was again formed in July, 1804.
The first battalion sailed from Ireland in December, 1808, to join the
troops in Hanover, but being recalled landed in England, February, 1806,
from whence it again embarked in August, for the Mediterranean, and
landed at Messina, in Sicily, the 4th of December of the same year.
The first battalion went to Egypt in May, 1807, and returned to Sicily
the November following.
In June, 1809, the first battalion went to Ischia and Procida, (Bay of
Naples), and returned to Sicily in August.
The second battalion, Sixty-Second Regiment, had remained quartered in
England and Jersey since its formation until February, 1813, when it sailed
for Ireland. It embarked from thenee the September following and joined
the army under the Duke of Wellington in Spain.
The first battalion embarked from Sicily in February, 1814, arrived at
Leghorn, iv Italy, in March, and served the campaign under Lord William
Bentinck, which terminate in the fall of Genoa. It embarked in May for
Nova Scotia, arrived at Halifax in August, and was sent to the United
States, where having assisted in the captures made in’ the Penobscot in
September, it remained at Castine until delivered up at the peace in May,
1815, when it returned to Halifax.
The second battalion Sixty-Second Regiment returned from Spain to
Ireland, September, 1814, and in July 1815 joined the army in France ;
from which country it embarked for England in January, 1816, and was
sent the following month to Ireland, where it remained till disbanded on
the 24th of March, 1817,
The left wing of the first battalion was sent to Bermuda, in July, 1815;
and joined the head quarters-at Halifax in the month of July, 1819,
Appendia. 218
8rd. Four companies of the Sixty-Second Regiment served under General
Amherst on the reduction of Louisberg, in 1758, and the following year
at the fall of Quebec, under General Wolfe.
While the regiment was stationed in Ireland, in 1760, the French landed
twelve hundred men under Thurot, at Carrickfergus, where three companies
were quartered under Colonel Jennings, consisting of about one hundred
and thirty men. He took post in a ruinous old castle with a breach
twenty feet wide, which the enemy stormed three times but were repulsed
with the bayonet. At length being wounded himself, having lost a num-
ber of his men, his ammunition being entirely expended, and there being
no hope of receiving succour, he was under the necessity of capitulating ;
but on account of the gallant defence made by the detachment they
marched out with the honours of war, and were allowed to remain prisoners
(on parole) in Ireland until exchanged. During the American Revolution
the regiment served in Canada under Sir Guy Carleton in 1776, and the
following year composed part of that gallant but unfortunate army, under
General Burgoyne. It distinguished itself at the action which took place
at Still Water, on the 19th September, and also in that of the 8th of
October following, prior to the convention of Saratoga. Having in this
campaign acted as a light infantry battalion, it was called Springers, by
which appellation it is still known in the British Army.
The regiment while in the West Indies was employed in the Maroon
Wars and in the operations in St. Domingo. In Ireland it assisted in
quelling the disturbances which took place in Dublin in the year 1803.
The Sixty-Second Regiment while in Egypt generally occupied the ad-
vanced posts, and on its return to Sicily the flank and a battalion company
were sent to the defence of Scylla Castle, in Calabria. The regiment aecom-
panied the expedition, under General Stewart, to the Bay of Naples, in
1809, which ended in the capture of the islands Ischia and Procida. It
was afterwards employed in the coast duty between the Faro and Messina,
during Murat’s threatened invasion of Sicily, for which purpose he col-
lected a large force on the opposite shore.
In 1811 information having been given by the Impéreuse and Thames
frigates that a valuable convoy for Naples had put into Palinuro, for the
capture of which a land-force was necessary, the Grenadiers and two
battalion companies of the 62nd Regiment, under the command of Major
Darley, were despatched from Melazzo for that service. They arrived off
that place on the 1st of November. Immediately landed and by climbing
up a very steep precipice succeeded in turning the enemy’s flank at a point
in which (from the nature of the ground) he thought himself secure. He
was strongly pested, with upwards of one thousand men, for the protection
of the only landing-place deemed practicable. This detachment, without
provisions or water, maintained its ground for two days against repeated
attacks, and the third, when the wind answered for the ships to come in
and silence the gun-boats, battery, and tower which protected the convoy,
the whole was captured and the defences of the place destroyed.
The grenadier company of the 62nd Regiment composed a part of the
grenadier battalion which went from Sicily to the eastern coast of Spain,
214 " The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
in 1812. The second battalion was engaged with the troops under the
Duke of Wellington at the several affairs which took place with the French
Army in the Pyrenees on the 9th, 10th, and 11th November, and the
9th, 10th, and 11th December, 1813, and served at the blockade of
Bayonne, in 1814.
The first battalion, Sixty-Second Regiment, was im the engagements
which took place on the heights above Genoa, the 16th April, 1814, which
terminated in the capture of that fortress. In September of that year
it was also employed at the taking of Castine, in the United States, and
remained to defend the same until restored to the Americans at the peace.
4th. In the earlier actions in which the Sixty-Second Regiment was engaged I am
unable to state the names of the officers, or the numbers of non-commissioned
officers or privates, who were killed or wounded by the enemy, or the dates
of the action. At the Battle of Still Water, which took place on the 19th
of September, 1777, Lt.-Col. Anstruther and Major Harnage were wounded,
and the following officers killed: Lieuts. Reynal Harvey, and Stewart,
Ensigns Taylor, Philips, and Young, and Adjutant Fitzgerald. On the
8th of October following, Lt.-Col. Anstruthers and Major Harnage were
again wounded, as also Captains Shrimpton and Bunbury, Ensigns Blake
aud Harvey ; Ensigns D’Autrock and Nailor were taken prisoners. The
regiment on the above-mentioned day lost ninety-seven sergeants, drummers
and rank and file,
At the defence of Scylla Castle on the 4th and 17th of February, 1808,
two rank and file killed and two rank and file wounded.
At Palinuro on the Ist of November, 1811, Captain Oldham was wounded
and Lieut. Kay killed, also two rank and file killed, one drummer, three
rank and file wounded.
Ensign Spier was lost in the gun-boats in Scylla in 1812.
On the 10th of December, 1813, the second battalion, Sixty-Second Regi-
ment, had three rank and file killed and one rank and file wounded at the
Passage of the Nive.
The first battalion, Sixty-Second Regiment, had three rank and file killed,
and three rank and file wounded at the action which took place on the
heights above Genoa, on the 16th of April, 1814.
5th. Brevet Lieut.-Col. Richard Roberts received the Sardinian Order of St.
Maurice and Lazar for his services in Italy at the head of the Quarter-
Master-General’s Department to the British_and Sicilian forces, in 1814,
and gazetted for the same, 30th June, 1817.
Captain William Hartley received an Egyptian medal when lieutenant
in the Twenty-Third Fusiliers, for his services in Egypt in 1801.
Surgeon Christopher R. Alderson received a Waterloo medal when
assistant-surgeon in the First Dragoons, for his services at Waterloo, on
the 18th of June, 1815.
6th. I find that in every encounter which the Sixty-Second Regiment, or any
portion of it, has had with the enemy, the conduct of all the non-com-
misioned officers and privates has been mentioned as exemplary, so that it
becomes unnecessary to particularize any individual.
7th. The second battalion, Sixty-Second Regiment, was, by a memorandum
a
Appendix. 215
from the War Office of the 18th of April, 1815, permitted to wear on the
colours and appointments the word ‘‘ Peninsula.”
D, XIMENES,
Major Sixty-Second Regt., and Lieut.-Col,
[Signature alone in Sir D. Ximene’s handwriting. ]
APPENDIX.—No. III
War Office Papers. No. II.
Srxty-SeconD REGIMENT.
Bangalore, 20th May, 1831.
Sir,
In compliance with directions contained in the cireular-letter, dated
Horse Guards, 25th August, 1830, I have the honour to transmit herewith a
revised record of the services of the Sixty-Second Regiment from the time of its
formation in 1756, to the end of 1830; having collected information as far as
practicable from such persons as I considered capable of rendering assistance in
the completion thereof.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedient humble Servant.
J. Reep, Lt.-Col.,
To the Adjutant-General of the Forces, Com. 62nd Regiment.
Horse Guards, London.
REcoRD OF THE SERVICES OF THE S1xtTy-SECOND OR WILTSHIRE
REGIMENT OF Foor,
1756. The Sixty-Second Regiment was raised in 1756 and added as a second
* battalion to the Fourth Foot.
1758. In 1758 it was numbered Sixty-Second. At this time four companies were
abroad and served that campaign at Louisberg, under General Amhurst,
and that of 1759, under General Wolfe at Quebec. After this campaign,
few men being left remaining, it was ordered to Europe.
_ 1760. In 1760 the French landed twelve hundred men under General Thurot,
at Carrickfergus, where three companies of the Regiment were stationed,
consisting of about one hundred and thirty men. These were posted in a
ruinous old castle, with a breach twenty feet wide. The French stormed
it three times and were as often repulsed with the bayonet. Colonel
Jennings, who was wounded, lost a great number of his men. At last this
detachment, having expended its ammunition, and no hopes of being re-
lieved remaining, capitulated, and on account of their gallant defence,
marched out with the honors of war, and were allowed to remain prisoners
of war, on parole in Ireland, until exchanged. It received the thanks of
the Irish House of Commons for its conduct on this occasion.
; 1763, In 1763 the Regiment was sent to the West Indies, = stationed in
Dominica.
g16 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
1769. Returned to Ireland. Stationed at Cork. Reduced on the Peace to
two hundred and seventy rauk and file. Stationed at Kinsale. Establish -
ment increased to four hundred.
L771. Stationed at Dublin.
1772. Stationed at Clare Castle,
1773. Stationed at Dublin.
1774. Stationed at Cork.
1775. Stationed at Galway. Establishment raised to five hundred and eighty.
1776. Embarked at Cork for America, and landed in Canada. Served the
campaign of this year under General Burgoyne, and was captured with
him at Saratoga. In this campaign it had killed and wounded one
lieutenant-colonel, one major, two captains, fourteen subalterns, fifteen
sergeants, nine drummers, and seventy-four rank and file. Was called
Springers from having acted as a light infantry battalion during this
campaign. Remained prisoners three years and then returned to England.
1780. Stationed at Lincoln this and following year.
1782. Stationed at Newark. Flank companies detached to Windsor, doing
duty over his Majesty.
1783. Stationed at Trowbridge. Marched from thence to Hilsea to embark
for foreign service, but peace haying taken place its embarkation was
countermanded.
1784. It marched to Berwick, Musselburgh and Dundee. From thence em-
barked for Ireland.
1785, Stationed at Galway.
1786. Stationed at Dublin.
1787. Stationed at Killarney, Ross Castle, &o., &e.
1788. Stationed at Youghall this and following year. Establishment reduced
to four hundred rank and file.
1790. Embarked for Nova Scotia and arrived at Halifax. From thence, without
* landing, was ordered to Jamaica. :
1793, Establishment increased to five hundred and seventy ; following year to
eight hundred and fifty, and the next to one thousand men.
1796. Employed against the Maroons and in the operations at St. Domingo
this and the following year. Having lost about twenty-five officers and
the greater part of the men, the few remaining were drafted, and the
skeleton of the regiment ordered to England, landed at Portsmouth and
marched to Poole,
1798. Stationed at Exeter. Recruited from supplementary militia. The whole
of the men which could be spared from recruiting were formed into a light
company and detached into Cornwall to form a light infantry battalion
with some militia light companies. Head-quarters of the battalion re-
. moved to South Molton, from thence to Helston, in Cornwall.
1799. Marched to Poole, ordered to recruit from militia. Received thirteen
hundred men; then formed into twobattalions. Establishment eight hundred
each, under orders to join the army in Holland, but that returning the above
order was countermanded.
1800. Disturbances still existing in Ireland, both battalions ordered to that —
country.
Appendix, R17
1801. Stationed at Fermoy. The regiment being limited to European service,
here volunteered to extend its services to Egypt, and received the approba-
tion of His Royal Highness the Commander in Chief on the occasion.
1802. At Cork. Second battalion reduced to the peace establisment—seven
hundred and fifty rank and file.
1803. At Dublin. In assisting to quell the insurrection which took place
there, received the thanks of the Commander of the Forces for its conduct.
From hence the regiment removed to Tullamore, Kilbeggan, and Ballinasloe.
1804. At Birr. A second battalion formed at Devizes, England.
1805. First battalion sailed from Middleton and embarked for the West Indies ;
countermanded, landed, and marched to Mallow, to be otherwise employed.
1806. First battalion sailed from Cork to join the troopsin Hanover. The
army being about to return from thence it disembarked in England.
Stationed at Braybourne Lees. Went into camp at Shorncliff. Embarked
at Ramsgate for foreign service. Landed and encamped in the neighbour-
hood of Plymouth. Sailed from thence with an expedition to the
Mediterranean.
1807. Arrived at Messina, in Sicily, in the course of the year sailed from
thence with an expedition to Egypt. Remained there about four months,
and returned to Sicily.
1808. Flank companies and one battalion company detached to the relief of
Scylla Castle, in Calabria, attacked by the French. Second battalion
stationed in Jersey.
1809. Sailed from Melazzo with an expedition under Sir John Stewart to
Naples which captured Ischia and Procida, destroyed the magazines, and
returned to Sicily,
1810. Employed along the coast of Sicily, opposite Calabria, where Murat had
' assembled a large force for the purpose of invading the island. It was
here exposed to much harrasing duty and frequent firing from the enemy’s
batteries, but Murat was obliged to relinquish all hopes of success, having
been foiled in his attempt to turn the right of the British line by landing
to the southward of Messina. In this attempt he lost fifteen hundred men.
1811. Three companies of the regiment embarked on board the Impéreuse and
Thames frigates, landed at Palinuro, on the Neapolitan coast,and maintained
their ground three days against the enemy, who were one thousand strong,
destroyed the batteries and succeeded in bringing off a valuable conyoy.
Lieutenant Kay, of the light company, killed; Captain Oldham, of the
grenadiers, severely wounded; one sergeant and two rank and file killed ;
one deummer and three rank and file wounded.
1812. The grenadier company, with the grenadier battalion, sent to the east
of Spain.
1813. The second battalion disembarked at Passages, in Spain, on the 6th of
October, and joined the army under the Duke of Wellington, in Lord
Aylmer’s brigade. It was present and took part in the operations of the
army crossing the Bidassoa and entering France, and those on the Niye,
in December—having been in position at the Mayor’s house, where some
men were woundad—and also those preparatory to the investment of
Bayonne.
| VOL, XV1I.—nNO. L, Q
218 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
1814. The first battalion sailed with an expedition, Landed at Leghorn,
marched from thence to Genoa, the enemy retiring upon the latter, where
an action took place which terminated in itscapture. The regiment, in
common with the rest of the troops employed, received the thanks of His
Royal Highness the Prince Regent on this occasion. Sailed from Genoa
with an expedition to the coast of America. Arrived at Halifax. Went
into camp. From thence proceeded against Castine, situated on the Pen-
obscot, in the district of Maine. ‘The place, together with the whole
district east of the Penobscot, surrendered with shipping, stores, &e. The
regiment received the thanks of His Royal Highness on this occasion, in
common with the rest of the troops employed.
The second battalion remained in the neighbourhood of Haves until
the end of August, when it embarked for Ireland, and landed at the Cove
of Cork the 7th September, and marched to Kinsale. The second battalion
was commanded during this service by Lt.-Col. N. Blackwell, who received
a Peninsular medal in consequence. The battalion partook of the royal
and parliamentary thanks given to the army.
1815. The district of Maine being restored to the Americans on the conclusion
of peace, the first battalion returned to Halifax. Left wing detached to
Bermuda.
The second battalion was quartered in Mallow and Kinsale until July,
when it marched to Cork and embarked on the 8th of that month to join
the army under the Duke of Wellington, in France. Disembarked at
Ostend, on the 17th July, marched to Paris, and were quartered at Monte
- Martre and Belleville.
1816. First battalion quartered at Halifax and Bermuda. The second batt-
alion marched from Paris and embarked at Calais on the 11th January.
Disembarked at Dover and Ramsgate, 14th January. Embarked again the
24th January, and sailed for Ireland, disembarked at Monkstown, 2nd
February, except Captain Radford’s and Captain Reed’s companies, which
were wrecked off Kinsale. Captain Radford was drowned, but the whole
1817.of the men saved. The battalion proceeded to Fermoy, from whence it
marched to Dundalk and Drogheda, where it remained until April, when
it marched to Dublin, and was reduced on the 24th of that month sending
four hundred men to complete the first battalion at Halifax, Nova Scotia.
1818. The Sixty-Second Regiment remained stationed at Halifax and Bermuda,
1819. The left wing joined the regiment at Halifax.
1820. One battalion company detached to Anuapolis and Windsor; the re-
mainder of the regiment remained at Halifax.
°1821. A battalion company detached this year to Cape Breton and Prince
Edward’s Island, and establishment of the regiment reduced to eight
companies.
1822. The regiment remained quartered between Halifax, Cape Breton, Prince
Edward’s Island, Annapolis and Windsor.
1823. The regiment embarked at Halifax, in three divisions, on the 25th
August, and 13th and 18th September. Arrived at Portsmouth on the
17th September, and 7th and 8th of October, from whence it was ordered
to proceed to Ireland, and landed at Ballinacor, on 22nd and 23rd of
Appendin. 219
October and 2nd of November. Marching from thence to Fermoy, and
remaining until the third of December, when it received the route for
Templemore, in the county of Tipperary, furnishing detachments at Thurles,
Littleton, New Birmingham, Roscrea, Ballivgar, Borrisokane, Fort
Cameron, Nenagh, and Borrisoleigh.
“1824. The regiment “remained quartered at Templemore, furnishing detachments
to Roserea, Kallingar, Nenagh, Bruff, Littleton, Newport, Thurles, New
Birmingham, Borrisokane, Fort Cameron, Bruree, and Cahirconlish.
1825. The regiment remained quartered at Templemore, furnishing detach-
ments to Roscrea, Nenagh, Bruff, Littleton, Newport, Thurles, New
Birmingham, Borrisokane, Fort Cameron, Bruree, and Cahirconlish, until
the 18th of July, when it received the route for Dublin, where it remained
quartered until the 6th of October, when it received a route for Enniskillen,
in which place it remained quartered for the remainder of the year, fur-
nishing a detachment, consisting of one subaltern, one sergeant, and twenty
rank and file, to Maguire’s Bridge—eight miles distant. _Here the regiment
was sickly and experienced a considerable loss from mortality, principally
among the recruits, owing to the wetness of the season, the situation of the
barracks, and the quality of the water.
The regiment was augmented this year to ten companies of seventy-four
rank and file each, and completed its augmentation by recruiting at the
head quarters of the regiment. It had also twenty recruiting parties
stationed in England, Ireland, and Scotland, which also contributed to-
wards completing it to its establishment. ,
1826. On the 31st of March the regiment moved to Londonderry, detaching
to Lifford, Kaphoe, Gorteen, Dergbridge, Killybegs, Donegal, Rutland,
Rathmolton, Rathmullan, Letterkenny, Knockalla (?), Me. Arnish (?), Inch
Island, Green Castle, Carndonagh, Dunree Fort (?), Dungiven, Newtown
Limavady, and Castledawson (?), and on the 13th September of the same
year returned to Enniskillen, detaching to Cavan, Virginia, Kingscourt,
_ Cootehill, Clones, Monaghan, Ballygawley,Omagh, Ballyshannon and Sligo.
1828. On the 17th of May the regiment marched from Enniskillen to Temple-
more, detaching to Thurles, Littleton, Tipperary, and Bansha.
On the 30th Jane the regiment marched from Templemore to Limerick,
leaving the sick and heavy baggage behind, also the detachments at
Tipperary and Thurles. On arrival at Limerick it furnished detachments
to Clare Castle, Crathrocross (?), Newmarket and Six-Mile-Bridge, during
the election at Ennis. Marched from Limerick to Templemore on the 8th
July, where it was stationed during the remainder of the year, furnishing
detachments in September to Nenagh and Roscrea.
1829. In this year His Majesty was graciously pleased to approve of the
regiment retaining on its colours aud appointments the word ‘‘ Peninsula,”
in a memorandum, dated War Office, 13th April, 1829, in commemoration
of the services of the late second battalion of the regiment in the Peninsula
} and France, from October, 1813, to August, 1814.
- 1830. The regiment remained quartered according to the above distribution
{ until the 22nd March, when it marched to Cork, on route to Chatham, for
the purpose of embarking for the Madras Presidency on the East India
Q 2
220 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
establishment, which movement took place on the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 7th of
June, leaving the Depét at Chatham under the command of Captain John
‘Walter. The head quarters and three companies arrived safe at Madras,
on the 16th and 17th September, and the remainder of the regiment
arrived on the 3rd, 11th, and 12th of October following. On the landing
of the first division under the command of Lt.-Col. Reed it marched to
Marmalong Bridge, six miles from Fort Saint George, and encamped, where
it remained seventeen days and proceeded on route to Bangalore, in the
Mysore Division, and arrived at that.station on the 29th October, and the
remainder of the regiment arrived at Bangalore on the 16th of November,
under the command of Major Parker.
The regiment continued stationed at Bangalore during the remaineder
of the year.
J. REED,
Lt.-Col. Com. H. M. Sixty-Second Regt.
[The body of the document is in a round clerical handwriting, the signature
alone being Col. Reed’s.]
APPENDIX.—No. IV.
War Office Papers. No. Il.
Sergeant Sullivan’s Memorial. Sizxty-Second Regiment.
To General Sir F. A. Weatherall, Colonel of Her Majesty’s Sixty-Second (or
Wiltshire) Regiment.
The memorial of James Sullivan, late Colour-Sergeant and Regimental
Clerk, Sixty-Second Regiment. i
Most humbly and most respectfully sheweth :— .
That memorialist, in July, 1835, forwarded to the late Field-Marshal Sir
Samuel Hulse, then Colonel of the Sixty-Second Regiment, a memorial, a copy
of which is hereunto annexed, relative to the services of the Sixty-Second Regi-
ment in different parts of the globe, which he supposes has been mislaid, or
perhaps not submitted to the perusal of the Field- Marshal in consequence of
indisposition.
And memorialist now refers it with the greatest confidence to the favorable
consideration of Sir F. A. Weatherall, recollecting that the General fouzht side
by side with the ‘Old Springers” on many a well-fought field during the first
American war, viz.; at Brooklyn, White Plain, Fort Washington, Elizabeth
Town, German Town, Prince Town, Monmouth, &e.
Memorialist is sorry that the recording the services of his regiment has not been
taken up and submitted to the proper quarter by some officer of rank who served
in the corps, but he is sorry to say that most of the old officers are now no more—
the only ‘‘ Peninsula” officer now serving in the Sixty-Second Regiment being
Appendix. | 122
Lieutenant and Quarter-Master Guy, whom memorialist received as a volunteer
from the militia, in 1812.
The Sixty-Second Regiment was always noted since its first formation for good
discipline, obedience to orders,good conduct in garrison and quarters,and gallantry
in the field’ when brought in collision with the enemies of its country. What
grief then must it give the memorialist, who shed his blood at the Battle of the
‘* Nive,” in not having that honorary word recorded on the colours and appoint-
ments of his former gallant corps, when he sees the word ‘‘ Nive” emblazoned on
the colours of the Eighty-Fifth Regiment. . . . In 1813 the late second bat-
talion, Sixty-Second Regiment, were inspected at Fermoy—one thousand strong-=
by Lt.-General Sir John Hope, preparatory to its embarkation for the Peninsula ;
when that gallant officer was pleased to say it was the prettiest battalion he ever
inspected. After the disembarkation of the corps in Spain, in many of the
companies the memorialist is sorry to say that proper attention was not paid to
the messing or necessaries of the soldiers, At Christmas, 1818, memorialist was
transferred from the light company to act as pay-sergeant of Captain Katen
[? Kater’s] company, which he found in a bad state, while at the same time heis
proud to record that no company in the Peninsula were in a more efficient state
than the light company, under the gallant Captain H. L. E. Gwynne, and it gives
memorialist pride to have to record that, notwithstanding those disadvantages, no
soldiers could behave better than the late second battalion, Sixty-Second Regi-
ment, did at the Battle of the ‘‘ Nive,” the six days they were engaged with the
enemies of their country, viz.: ,the 9th, 10th, 11th November, and the 9th,
10th, and 11th December, 1813. The late second battalion, Sixty-Second
Regiment suffered severely in the ‘‘ Peninsula,” so much so that tne bones of
nearly seven hundred gallant young soldiers of that corps lie on the “‘ Pyrenees
mountains.”
The facings of the Eighty-Fifth Regiment” were yellow in the ‘‘ Peninsula ; ”
their facings are now b/ue, as memorialist is informed by the recommendation
of that gallant officer, Major-General Thornton. Memorialist most respectfully
begs to remark that the original facings of the Sixty-Second Regiment were blue
when second battalion of Fourth (or King’s Own) Regiment.
Memorialist here begs most respectfully to remark that he has always noted
passing events in his military journal, which he still continues, and that he
always considered Major-General Thornton as the best commanding officer he
ever knew, with the exception of Major-General Sir David Ximines, tate of the
Sixty-Second Regiment. Both these gallant officers were strict disciplinarians,
but at the same time the firm friends of the soldier, the soldier’s wife, and the
soldier’s orphan.
Memorialist is sure that his Colonel, General Sir F. A. Weatherall (who has
nobly served his country sixty: three years, thirty-nine years of which the gallant
general has been in arms in different parts of the globe, and whose achievements
are too numerous for humble pen of memorialist to record). He therefore hopes
that the general will deem it a sufficient excuse for troubling him with this
- document, ‘‘‘That the veterans of the British Army” with “stick” and -
*‘ crutch ” fight the battles of their regiments over again.
And in conclusion he most humbly implores the Almighty God, under whom
princes reign, nations flourish, and armies conquer, may long preserve for many
222 “The Wiltshire. Regiment for Wiltshire.” —
years General Sir F. A. Weatherall at the head of the Sixty-Second Regiment.
The whole of which is most humbly and most respectfully submitted to the
General’s favourable consideration, by his most faithful and obedient soldier
still to command,
JAMES SULLIVAN,
New Castle, County Limerick, Late Col.-Sergt., and Kegt. Clerk,
Treland, 28th July, 1838, H. M. Sixty-Second Regt.
[Copr.]
To Field-Marshal The Right Honorable Sir Samuel Hulse, @.C.B., Colonel of
His Majesty’s Sixty-Second or Wiltshire Regiment of Foot.
The memorial of James Sullivan, late Coluur-Sergeant and Regimental
Clerk of H. M. Sixzty-Second Regiment, who was placed on the out-pension of
Chelsea Hospital, on the 18th day of July, 1827, at the rate of 1s. per day.
Most humbly and most respectfully sheweth :—
That memorialist was actually present and engaged with the enemies of his
country near St. Jean de Luz, on the morning of the 9th November, 1813, as
will appear by the following testimonial :—
(EXTRACT.) ** Bhydy Gouve, Nov. 1st, 1826.
*T certify that James Sullivan was ‘in the light company under my command near St. Jean de
Luz, in a skirmish witb the French on the 9th, 10th, and J1th Nov., 1813, as well as at ayonne, on
the 9th, 10th, and 11th December, 1813, and conducted himself to my perfect satisfaction.
(Signed) “HH. L. E. Gwynne,
** Capt. H. P. Second Battalion Sixty-Second Regiment,’’
That memorialist was one of the first men of Lord Aylmer’s (or the Indepen-
dents) Brigade who crossed the ‘‘ Nive ” on the morning of the 10th November,
1813, in pursuit of the French, being then a corporal, and commanding the ad-
vanced section of the three light companies of the Sixty-Second, Seventy-Sixth,
and Eighty-Fifth Regiments, under the command of a field officer of the Seventy-
Sixth Regiment.
Memorialist therefore most humbly prays that his Colonel Field-Marshal the
Right Hon. Sir Samuel Hulse, may be pleased to make application to the proper
quarter to have the honorary word ‘‘ Nive’’ placed on the colours and appoint-
ments of H.M. Sixty-Second (or Wiltshire) Regiment of Foot.
Memorialist begs leave most respectfully to remark, that the late Major-
General Nathaniel Blackwell (C.B.) got the rank of colonel and a clasp or medal
for commanding the late second battalion Sixty-Second Regiment at the battle
of the “Nive.” The Eighty-Fifth Light Infantry has the word ‘ Nive” on
their appointments, whilst the other two regiments of Lord Aylmer’s Brigade,
the Sixty-Second and Seventy-Sixth Regiments are still left without that
honorary distinction.
Memorialist is fully aware of the gallantry displayed by the Eighty-Fifth
Regiment on that glorious occasion, he being within a few paces of Mr. Johnston
at the time that that officer was shot dead by the enemy, on the morning of the
9th November, 1813, but with the greatest respect memorialist begs to remark
Appendiz. 223
that the Eighty-Fifth in his humble opinion did not surpass the bravery of the
late second battalion Sixty-Second Regiment on that occasion, and as an illus-
tration of their gallantry he begs to relate the following anecdote of three brave
soldiers of the Sixty-Second Regiment, which occurred at the battle of the
‘‘ Nive.’ One of them, a young lad named O’Brien, who volunteered with
memorialist from the County Limerick Regiment of Militia, stood in the centre
of his company, when a cannon shot came and took both his legs off, together
with three legs off the two men on his right and left. When the brave young
soldier fell he addressed his comrades, with a smile on his countenance :—‘‘ I
‘shall go home to old Ireland to dig Murphys again.” But the hand of death
was then upon him, as himself and his two comrades bled to death that night
before they could receive surgical attendance, and their ashes now lie on the
field of Hona [Horn] on the ‘‘ Pyrenees Mountains,” in the front of Bayonne,
together with many a gallant comrade ; as also memorialist’s illustrious country-
man, Lt.-Col. Lloyde, a native of Rath Keale, county of Limerick, who
gallantly fell at the head of the Eighty-Fourth Regiment while endeavouring
to drive back the French who sallied out of Bayonne, on the morning of the
10th December, 1813.
The second anecdote is related to a soldier named Conolly. A shell dropped
opposite the company in which he was a supernumary non-commissioned officer.
Conolly gallantly advanced, coolly took the shell between both his hands, with
the fuse nearly burnt out, and hurled it with all his might down the mountaia
side, thereby saving the lives of many of his comrades to the very great risk of
his own. Memorialist begs to remark that this is not the only instance in
which a soldier of the Sixty-Second Regiment acted in a similar manner with a
‘shell. A detachment of Major Hull’s company, Sixty-Second Regiment occupied
Sheela (Seylla ?) Castle, on the coast of Calabria, when a Shell was thrown by the
French on the ramparts of the castle amidst a group of the soldiers of the
Sixty-Second Regiment. It was immediately seized and thrown over the
ramparts by Private John Hickey. Memorialist acted as a pay-sergeant of
Major Hull’s company in 1819. The year that Hickey was discharged he heard
this anecdote related by several non-commissioned officers and men of the com-
pany, and as memorialist is now treating of the first battalion, Sixty-Second
Regiment, he begs to state that in consequence of the sergeant-major of the
Sixty-Second Regiment being an illiterate man, he was appointed regimental
clerk, as will appear from the following certificate, which he received from his
‘townsman, the late Major Parker, Sixty-Second Regiment, who lately died at
“Bangalore, and who was for many years adjutant of the Sixty-Second regiment:
(copy.) “ Templemore, 15th December, 1824.
“This is to certify that Sergeant James Sullivan acted as regimental clerk in the orderly room
under my charge since the month of July, 1819, and that I invariably found him extremely atten-
_ tive and correct in his duty, and consider that there are few better clerks in the British Army,
(Signed) EpwarpD PARKER,
Late Adjutant Sixty-Second Regiment.
That memorialist having the charge of the records and other documents of
the Sixty- -Second Regiment, he thereby became acquainted with their achieve-
ments in different parts of the globe,
224 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.’’
The Sixty-Second was originally the second battalion of the Fourth Regiment.
It was afterwards called the regiment of Stroud (or Stroud’s Regiment). It
was numbered Sixty-Second about eighty years ago. It was present in the West
Indies during the Maroon War, where it lost a number of brave officers and
soldiers. It was also through the whole of the first American War, where it
was first called ‘* Sprimgers,” a name by which it is still well known in the
British Army. It derived this name under tke following circumstances—it
acted as a light infantry battalion in an action with the enemy, when the con-
duct of the regiment meeting the eye and approbation of their general, he cried
out: ‘* Well done my brave Springers.”’ It lost a number of brave officers and
soldiers during this war, and the skeleton of the regiment was made prisoners,
at the battle of Steel Water.
Four companies of the Sixty-Second Regiment, under the command of Colonel
Jennings, occupied the Castle of Carrickfergus at the time of the attack of that
town by the French under Thurot, where from the ruinous state of the castle
and having expended their ammunition they were forced to capitulate, and were
allowed to march out with the honours of war, and both officers and men were
allowed to pass on their parole to Dublin. There is still a traditional report in
the regiment that it was in consequence of this detachment, when they ran
short of ammunition, having fired half the cartridge with ball and the other
half with the buttons which they cut off their clothes, that the regiment wears
the ball on their buttons.
The first battalion Sixty-Second Regiment served in Egypt.
A detachment of the Sixty-Second Regiment, under command of Major
Darley, aided by a party of Marines took an island in the Mediterranean called
‘‘ Prodiga” (Procida), from a very superior French Force. For that gallant
exploit, that brave officer got the rank of Lieut-Colonel.
On the return of the late second battalion Sixty Second Regiment to Ireland
from France, in 1816, where memorialist had the honour of serving part of
the campaign and doing duty in ‘“ Paris” for some mouths under the command
of His Grace Field-Marshal the Duke of Wellington with the allied army.
the brave Lt.-Colonel Darley had the command of the Lord Melville, which
was wrecked on the Irish coast. When the ship struck on the rocks the captain
and part of tbe crew attempted to abandon her, on which the brave colonel drew
his sword and said he would cut the head of the first sailor that attempted to
leave the ship until every man, woman, and child of the regiment was put on
shore, thereby saving the lives of the whole of his detachment with the ex-
ception of Captain Radford, who, with the mate of the ship, dropped into a
small boat alongside, where they sunk almost immediately, to rise no more,
The first battalion, Sixty-Second Regiment, were also present at the taking
of ‘‘Genoa” and ‘‘ Sayona,” in Italy, from the French.
They were also present at the taking of ‘‘ Castine,” in North America from
the Americans. Brevet-Major Riddell got the rank of Lieut.-Col. for com-
manding the grenadiers of the Twenty-Ninth, Sixty-Second and late Ninety-
‘Eighth Regiments, together with the companies of the Sixtieth Regiment at
the capture of Hamden, near Castine. The brave Lieut.-Colonel D. Ximenes
(now Major-General Sir D. Ximenes, K.H.) commanded the Sixty-Second Regi-
ment at the capture of Castine. Sir D., Ximenes to the true intent of the word
Appendix. 225
was the soldier’s friend, and memorialist received from Sir David a certificate,
7 of which the following is a copy :—
“This is to certify that Sergeant James Sullivan has served as clerk in the orderly room of
the Sixty-Second Regiment since the month of November, 1817. I have invariably found him
wee
” to be a sober, steady, well-conducted and deserving man. I give him this certificate in conse.
quence of my leavlng the regiment on promotion, :
(Signed) D, Xmenes,
“ Templemore, Major Sixty-Second Regiment and Lt.-Col.”
Feb. 25th, 1825.”
Memorialist is grieved to see that the only distinction of his former gallant
corps is the word “ Peninsula,” notwithstanding their valor in all parts of the
globe, and not forgetting their recent sufferings on the march from Bangalore
to Masulipatam, East Indies, where the ashes of many a brave Peninsular, Nive,
Pyrenees, Genoa, Savona, and Castine warrior of the brave Sixty-Second lies
interred between the mountains of that Heathen land.
; Lt.-Col. Robertson, half-pay of the regiment, got the order of Maria and
Ct Theresa for service in Sicily and Italy, and Major Hartley a gold medal for
service in Egypt.
The whole of which is most humbly and most respectfully submitted to the
favorable consideration of his colonel, by his most faithful and obedient soldier
still to. command,
JamEs SULLIVAN,
New Castle, Late Col.-Sergt., and Regt. Clerk,
Ireland, July 1st, 1835. H.M. Sixty-Second Regt.
eee
APPENDIX.—No. V.
Histortcat Recorp or THE Services or H.M. Srxty-SEconp (oR WILTSHIRE)
REGIMENT OF Foor.
[Favoured by Major-General General Ingall, CB.
Actions in which
distinguished.
DATES.
1756 The Sixty-Second Regiment was raised in 1756 and added as
a second battalion to the Fourth Foot,
1758 In 1758 it was numbered Sixty-Second. At this time four
companies were abroad, and served the campaign at Louisberg
Plains of under General Amherst, and that of 1759 under General Wolfe
Abraham, Quebec. at Quebeo, where it was engaged in the glorious action of the
“Plains of Abraham.” After this campaign, few men being
left remaining, it was ordered to Europe.
1760 In 1760 the French landed twelve hundred men under General
Thurot at Carrickfergus, where the companies of the regiment
were stationed, consisting of about one hundred and thirty men.
These were posted in a ruinous old castle with a breach twenty
feet wide. The French stormed it three times, and were as
often repulsed with the bayonet. Colonel J ennings, who was
wounded, lost a great numberof hismen. At last, the detach-
ment having expended its ammunition, and no hopes of being
VOL. XV1I.—NO. L. R
226 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
relieved remaining, capitulated, and on account of their gallant
defence,marched out with the honors of war, and were allowed,
to remain prisoners of war, on parole, in Ireland, until ex-
changed. It received the thanks of the Irish House of
Commons for its conduct on this occasion.
1763 In 1763 the Regiment was sent to the West Indies and
stationed in Dominica.
1769 Returned to Ireland. Stationed at Cork, reduced on the
peace to two hundred and seventy rank and file.
Stationed atKinsale. Establishment increased to four hundred.
1771 Stationed at Dublin.
1772 Stationed at Clare Castle.
1773 Stationed at Dublin.
1774 Stationed at Cork.
1775 Stationed at Galway. Establishment raised to five hundred
and eighty.
1776 Embarked at Cork for America, and landed in Canada, served
the campaign, this year, under General Burgoyne,
Stattoned tn Ireland.
Saratoga.
Where the regi- ¢ TasY 4 i r
Setiagulohed stcok? In this campaign it had killed, one lieut-colonel, one major,
with two others, two captains, fourteen subalterns, fifteen sergeants, nine
Twine rea and drummers,and seyenty-four rank and file. Was called “Spring-
erage brunt ers” from having acted as a light infantry battalion during the
a . . . .
The flank com. campaign. Remained prisoners three years and then returned
panies having pre-
viously assisted in to England.
repulsing the enemy
at ‘* Trois Rivieres,”
3 1780 Stationed at Lincoln this and following year.
= 1782 Stationed at Newark. Flank companies detached to Windsor,
5 doing duty over His Majesty.
1783 Stationed at Trowbridge. Marched from thence to Hilsea,
3 to embark for foreign service, but peace having taken place, its
3 embarkation was countermanded.
S 1784 It marched to Berwick, Musselburgh, and Dundee, from thence
PS embarked for Ireland.
& 1785 Stationed at Galway.
reins 1786 Stationed at Dublin.
SS 1787 Stationed at Killarney, Ross Castle, &c., &e.
Ss > 1788 Stationed at Youghall this and following year. Establish-
PS i. ment increased to four hundred rank and file.
1790 Embarked for Nova Scotia, and arrived at Halifax. From
thence, without landing, was ordered to Jamaica.
1793 Establishment increased to five hundred and seventy; the
following year to eight hundred and fifty; and the next to
one thousand men.
1796 Employed against the Maroons and in the operations against
them at St. Domingo, this and the following year. Having
lest about twenty-five officers, and the greater part of the men,
Appendix. 227
the few remaining were drafted, and the skeleton of the regi-
ment ordered to Engiand. Landed at Portsmouth and marched
to Poole.
h 1798 Stationed at Exeter. Recruited from supplementary militia.
The whole of the men who could be spared from recruiting
were formed into a light company, and detached into Cornwall
a to form a light infantry battalion with some militia light com-
; panies. Head-quarters of the battalion removed to South
| Molton, from thence to Helston, in Cornwall.
| 1799 Marched to Poole. Ordered to recruit from the militia ; re-
| ceived thirteen hundred men; formed into two battalions,
establishment eight hundred each, under orders to join the
army in Holland, but that returning the above order was
countermanded.
: 1800 Disturbances still existing in Ireland, both battalions were
ordered to that country.
1801 Stationed at Fermoy. The regiment being limited to European
service here volunteered to extend its services to Egypt, and
received the approbation of His Royal Highness the Com-
mander-in-Chief on that occasion.
1802 At Cork. Second battalion reduced to peace establishment,
seven hundred and fifty rank and file.
1803 At Dublin. In assisting to quell the insurrection that took
place there received the thanks of the Commander of the
Forces -for its conduct. From hence the regiment removed to
Tullamore, Kilbeggan and Ballinasloe.
1804 At Birr. A second battalion formed at Devizes, England.
1805 First battalion sailed trom Middleton, and embarked for the
West Indies. Countermanded, landed, and marched to Mallow
to be otherwise employed.
1806 First battalion sailed from Cork to join the troops in Hanover,
but the army being about to return from thence it disembarked
in England. Stationed at Brayborne Lees, and went into
‘camp at Shorncliffe.
Embarked at Ramsgate for foreign service, landed and en-
camped in the neighbourhood of Plymouth. Sailed from thence
with the expedition to the Mediterranean.
1807 Arrived at Messina, in Sicily in the course of the year, Sailed
from thence with an expedition to Egypt. Remained there
about four months and returned to Sicily.
1808 Flank companies and one battalion company detached to the
relief of Scylla Castle in Calabria, attacked by the French,
Second battalion stationed in Jersey.
1809 Sailed from Melazzo with an expedition under Sir John
Biiature of Stewart to Naples, which captured Ischia and Procida, des-
Ischia& Procida, troyed the magazines, and returned to Sicily.
1810 Employed along the coast of Sicily opposite Calabria, where
Murat had assembled a large force for the purpose of invading
R2
eh ee
4
228
“The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
the island. It was here exposed to much harassing duty and
frequent firing from the enemy’s batteries, But Murat was
obliged to relinquish all hopes of success, having been foiled in
his attempt to turn the right of the British line, by landing to
the southward of Messina, In this attempt he lost fifteen
hundred men.
1811 Three companies of the regiment embarked on board the
Impéreuse and Thames frigates, landed at Palinuro on the
Neapolitan coast, and maintained their ground three days
against the enemy, who were one thousand strong, destroyed
the batteries and succeeded in bringing off a valuable convoy.
Lieutenant Kay, of the light company, killed ; Captain Oldham,
of the grenadiers, severely wounded, one sergeant and two
tank and file wounded.
1812 The grenadier company with the grenadier battalion sent to
the east of Spain.
1813 The second battalion disembarked at Passages, in Spain, on
Nive.
the 6th October, and joined the army under the Duke of
Wellington in Lord Aylmer’s Brigade. It was present and
took part in the operations of the army crossing the Bidassoa
and entering France, those on the Nive, in December, having
Mayor's House. been in position at the mayor’s house, where some men were
’
wounded, and also those preparatory to the investment of
Bayonne.
1814 The first battalion sailed with an expedition, landed at
Capture of
Genoa,
Leghorn, marched from thence to Genoa, the enemy retiring
upon the latter, where an action took place which terminated
in its capture. ‘The regiment, in common with the rest of the
troops received the thanks of His Royal Highness the Prince |
Regent on this occasion. It sailed from Genoa with an ex-
pedition to the coast of America. Arrived at Halifax. Went
into camp. From thence proceeded against Castine, situated on
the Penobseot, which surrendered with shipping, stores, &e.
The regiment received the thanks of H. k. Highness on this
occasion in common with the rest of the troops employed.
SecondBattalion The second battalion remained in the neighbourhood of
in Peninsula, Bayonne until the end of August, when it embarked for
Ireland, and landed at the Cove of Cork, the 7th September,
and marched to Kinsale. The second battalion was commanded
by Lt.-Col. N. Blackwell during this service, who received a
Peninsular medal in consequence. The battalion partook of
the royal and parliamentary thanks given to the army.
1815 The district of Maine being restored to the Americans on the
conclusion of peace, the first battalion returned to Halifax.
Left wing detached to Bermuda,
The second battalion was quartered in Mallow and Kinsale
until July, when it marched to Cork, and embarked on the 8th
of that month to join the army under the Duke of Wellingtor
©
a
Appendix. 229
in France. Disembarked at Ostend, on the 17th July, marched
to Paris, and was quartered at Monte Martre and Belville.
1816 First battalion quartered at Halifax and Bermuda.
The second battalion marched from Paris, and embarked at
Calais, on the 11th January. Disembarked at Dover and
Ramsgate, 14th January. Embarked again the 24th January,
and sailed for Ireland. Disembarked at Monkstown, 2nd
February, except Capt. Radford’s and Capt Reed’s companies,
which were wrecked off Kinsale. Capt. Radford, was drowned,
but the whole of the men saved.
The battalion proceeded to Fermoy, from whence it marched
to Dublin, and was reduced on the 24th of that month, sending
four hundred men to complete the first battalion at Halitax,
Nova Scotia.
1818 The Sixty-Second Regiment remained stationed at Halifax
and Bermuda.
1819 The left wing joined the regiment at Halifax.
1820 One battalion company detached to Annapolis, the regiment
remaining at Windsor.
1821 A battalion company detached this year to Cape Breton and
Prince Edward’s Island, Annapolis and Windsor.
1823 The regiment embarked at Halifax, and arrived at Ports-
mouth, or 8th October, from whence it was ordered to proceed
to Ireland, landed at Ballinacor, on the 22nd and 28rd
of October, and 2nd of November, (in three divisions,)
marching from thence to Fermoy, and remaining until the 3rd
of December, when it received the route for Templemore.
1824 The regiment remained quartered at Templemore.
1825 The regiment remained quartered at Templemore until the
11th July, when it received the route for Dublin, where it re-
mained quartered until the 6th October, when it received a
route for Enniskillen in which place it remained quartered for
the remainder of the year. Here the regiment wassickly, and
experienced a considerable loss from mortality, principally
among the recruits, owing to the wetness of the season, the
situation of the barracks, and the quality of the water.
The regiment was augmented this year to ten companies of
seventy-four rank and file.
1826 On the 31st March, the regiment moved to Londonderry, and
on the 13th of September, same year, returned to Enniskillen.
1828 On the 17th May the regiment marched from Enniskillen to
Templemore, detaching to Thurles, Littleton, Tipperary and
Bansha.
On the 30th of June, the regiment marched from Templemore —
to Limerick, leaving the sick and heavy baggage behind, also
the detachments at Tipperary and Thurles, Marched from
Limerick to Templemore on 8th July, where it was stationed
during the remainder of the year.
rR a ne
Rt Naa : -
Do se
230
© The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
1829 In this year His Majesty was graciously pleased to approve
of the regiment retaining on its colours and appuintments the
word ‘ Peninsula,’’ in commemoration of the late second
battalion’s service in the Peninsula and France, from October,
1813, to August, 1814.
The regiment received orders to proceed to Limerick on 27th
July.
1830 The regiment left Limerick on March 22nd, for Chatham, for
Embarked for embarkation to the Madras presidency.
India.
Arrived at
Bangalore.
On landing they proceeded to Marmalong Bridge, six miles
‘from Fort St. George, where they encamped. It remained
there seventeen days, and then proceeded to Bangalore, in the
Mysore division, and arrived at that station on the 29th
October.
The regiment continued stationed at Bangalore during the
remainder of the year.
1831 Owing to disturbances in the Nugger province of the Mysore
Bangalore.
division, the flank companies, under the command of Major
Singleton, with a brigade of guns, marched from Pangalore,
14th May, 1831, for the purpose of joining the field force
assembled at Sheemogah, under the command of Lieut.-Col.
R, L. Evans, Hon. Company’s service. The companies, by
forced and difficult marching, joined the force on the 29th same
month, and the whole were ordered to advance upon Nugger,
which they found evacuated. Tranquility having been re-
stored in the province, the troops recommenced their march for
Bangalore, where they arrived on the 10th of July following.
The companies while with the field force lost nine men from
cholera. The companies received the thanks of the Major-
General commanding the Mysore division, and of the Govern-
ment, and Commander in Chief, in common with the rest of
the troops, for their services on this occasion. The regiment
remained in Bangalore until the end of the year.
1832 ‘The regiment remained stationed in Bangalore during the
Bangalore.
year. In July His Majesty was graciously pleased to appoint
Lt.-Col. John Reed a Knight of the Royal Hanoverian Guelphic
Order.
In October a conspiracy was discovered among the native
troops in garrison, several of whom were sentenced to death,
six only of whom suffered, viz., four blown from cannon, and
two shot by musketry; the remainder were transported for
life.
1833 Received the route for Masulipatam, to relieve Forty-Fifth
March to
Masulipatam.
Regiment, for which place the regiment marched in one division
on the morning of the 18th February. On the 3rd March
India cholera made its appearance. While camped at Kulgherry
five men died. On the 26th the regiment reached the sea and
encamped at Ramapatam, almost upon the beach. As the
'
Appendiz. 2381
termination of this disastrous march approached the admissions
; i into hospital from cholera became less, and on the 13th the regi-
ment arrived at Masulipatam with three hundred and eighty-
i six men fit for duty.
On the 21st May the usual hot winds set in with considerable
violence. The admissions into hospital during the three fol-
lowing days were upon an average of fifty per day.
The state of the regiment was reported to the Commander-in-
Chief, Madras, and the Commander-in-Chief in India. The
latter gave instructions to have the cause of sickness inves-
tigated, which was done by a medical committee, who, in
addition to their opinion on the proceedings, recommended the
removal of upwards of two hundred men to sea, for the benefit
of their health. This was complied with. Eleven of these
men died on board the Abberton at sea, and the remainder
were re-admitted into hospital with dropsy, and scurvy, from
which disease and dysentry an unusual number of deaths
occurred. ;
1834 In the early part of the year the health of the regiment im-
Masulipatam. proved. In June the rain commenced, which brought on violent
attacks of feverand ague. The hospital crowded, and part of
the barracks appropriated for the sick. Deaths from fever and
dysentry now averaged seven per day. Another report was
made to the Commander in Chief in India (Lord W. Bentick).
An order directing the removal of the regiment to Moulmein,
and the abolition of Masulipatam as an European military
station, was immediately issued. The total loss during the stay
of the regiment at Masulipatam (sixteen months), amounted
to three officers, one hundred and eighty-seven non-com-
missioned officers and privates, twenty-six women and eighty-
: nine children.
Embark for The regiment embarked in three divisions on the 8th September
Moulmein. on board the Swallow, Alexander, and Princess, and disem-
barked on the 16th, 17th and 22nd September, at Moulmein ;
the regiment still remaining very sickly.
1835 The health of the regiment rapidly improved since its arrival
At Moulmein. in the Tenasserim provinces.
1836 Several extensive and destructive fires took place in the can-
_ At Moulmein tonment and neighbouring town, the progress of which were
arrested and finally subdued by the zeal, activity, and promp-
titude of the non-commissioned officers and men of the regi-
; ment, under the orders of the officers.
At Moulmein. 1837 The regiment still continued stationed at Moulmein.
At Moulmein. 1838 ‘The regiment still continued stationed at Moulmein.
1839 Reports of its being the intention of the Burmese at Martaban
_ At Moulmein. to send emissaries over to set fire to the town and magazine, if
possible, at this place, precautionary measures were at once taken,
Establishment of regiment in India increased this year to
232 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
one thousand and forty non-commissioned officers and rank
and file.
1840 There were no ship arrivals from Calcutta from March to May,
At Moulmein. which caused great inconvenience to the station, in the sus-
pension of communication and supplies. ‘This was attributed
to the Chinese Expedition, which occupied the attention of the
shipping interest.
Affairs in Nepaul wearing a threatening aspect if was de-
termined to remove H.M, Sixty-Second Regiment to Bengal,
supplying its place at Moulmein by a native battalion. Ac-
cordingly the regiment embarked on the 24th September, and
arrived at Calcutta on the 4th October.
On the departure of the regiment from Moulmein the fol-
lowing testimony to its good conduct, during the period of six
years that it was quartered there, was forwarded to the supreme
Government of India; a copy of which was transmitted to
Lt.-Col. Reed, by E. Blundel, Esq., the Commissioner, Tenas-
serim provinces, with the accompanying letter from that
gentleman :—
No. 92.
“* To Lieutenant-Colonel Reed, Commanding H.M. Sizty-Second Regiment.
Sir,
In the hope that the record of my sentiments as to the excellent conduct
of the regiment under your command during the period of their services in the
provinces, may prove not altogether unacceptable to you, I do myself the honor
to enclose a copy of a letter which I have this day addressed to the Secretary to
the Government of India.
I have, &c.,
(Signed) E. BuunpeELt,
Commissioner in the Tenasserim Provinces.”
No. 130.
“To H. Torrens, Esq., Secretary to the Government of India, Secret and
Political Department, Fort William.
Bir,
Her Majesty’s Sixty-Second Regiment being now on the-point ofem-
barkation for the presidency, I have the honor to request that you will lay be-
fore the Right Honourable the Governor-General of India, in Council, the
expression I entertain of the conduct of the regiment during the long period of
six years that it has been serving in these provinces. Of its military efficiency
it becomes me not to say anything, but it is truly gratifying to me to be able to
state that no instance has ever occurred of disagreement with the natives of
the country, with whom their intercourse has been always unrestrained, and
by whom no complaint has ever been preferred. On the contrary the kindest
feelings have always prevuiled on the part of the inhabitants towards the men
of| the regiment, and I eannot but feel personally grateful to Lieutenant-Colonel
Reed and his officers for their exertion in promoting the good understanding.
I have, &c.,
(Signed) E. A. Buunpett,
*« Moulmein, Commissioner,””
21st Sept., 1840.”
The Regiment having received orders to march to Ghazepore
and subsequently for Hazareebaugh left Fort William on the
“Sth November, and arrived there on the 7th December.
Appendix. 233
1841 The rains set in about the middle of June, and the sickness
Hazareebaugh. which had been increasing in the regiment since the commence-
ment of the hot season got to such an extent that there were
one hundred and fifty men in hospital, of whom, in the three
months during which the rains continued, thirty-eight died.
1841 In the middle of October orders were received for the march
March from of the regiment to Fort William, to replace the Fiftieth, or-
Hazareebaugh to dered to Moulmein, the regiment accordingly marched in two
Fort William. divisions from Hazareebaugh on the ist and 8th of November,
and arrived at Fort William on the 30th of that month, and
9th of December, respectively.
1842 On the occasion of the birth of an Heir to the Imperial Crown
Fort William. of Great Britain, the senior Lt.-Colonel of the regiment was
appointed Aide-de-Camp to Her Majesty, with the rank of
colonel in the army.
Before leaving Fort William (orders having been received
for embarkation to Dinapore,) an entertainment was given to
the officers at the Town Hall by the European Society at
Caleutta, as a mark of the high estimation in which they were
held.
Embark for The first division of the regiment embarked in boats for
Dinapore. Dinapore, on the 11th of August. With the exception of two or
three casualties from drowning in consequence of carelessness
and disregard of orders on the part of the sufferers,and detention
to replace unserviceable boats and deficiencies in boatmen, the
voyage passed over prosperously till the 5th of September, the
afternoon of which day (a remarkably sultry one) the fleet
Luguod on the left side of the river, opposite a place called
Sickree Gully.
About two o’clock on the morning of the 6th September, a
violent hurricane arose, drove most of the fleet from the bank
to which the boats were moored, many of which were swamped,
and two officers, Lieutenants Scobell and Gason, five sergeants,
four corporals, thirty-four privates, six women, and twelve
children lost. Colonel and Mrs. Reed, Lieutenant and Mrs.
Evatt had a narrow escape of a watery grave, the pinnace of
the former, and the budgerow of the latter, were upset im-
mediately, but the latter remained attached to the bank, and
Mr. and Mrs. Evatt were saved by the assistance of Lieutenant
and Quartermaster Guy, whose pinnace had not been driven or
blown over. Colonel Reed’s pinnace floated down the current
its inmates having contrived to get upon the sides of it—Col.
and Mrs. Reed through the window of the after-cabin. In
this perilous position they remained for about three hours, the
boat occasionally rolling from one side to the other, sometimes
bottom upwards, sometimes on her beam-ends, but never
fortunately righted, in which case she must have gone down.
The people on the banks near which they passed disregarded
VOL, XV1I.—NO. L. s
234 Memoir of the Rev. John Witkinson.
their cries for assistance, notwithstanding there were plenty
of boats at hand. At daybreak the dingy (jolly boat) of
the pinnace was discovered still attached to her by the painter.
By the time she had been righted and half baled out, the
wreck had arrived opposite Rajhmal, when, through the merci-
fully miraculous intervention of Providence, who had thus
answered their prayers for deliverance, they were all safely
landed. About forty or fifty non-commissioned officers and
privates, who had been similarly saved, subsequently collected
at Rajmahal, and proceeded with the colonel to overtake the
regiment, in a steamer that had been sent to their assistance
from Bhagalpore, the nearest civil station, on receipt of Col.
Reed’s report of the disaster. The colors of the regiment,
which were on board Colonel Reed’s pinnace, were lost, with
little hopes of their being eventually recovered. The division
arrived at Dinapore on the Ist of October.
[TRUE COPY. ] T. J. Z. G. Stuon, Capt.,
Curragh Camp, Commanding Depét Sixty-Second Regiment.
23rd May, 1876.
Atlemoirs of the Aes. Aohn Clilkinson and
George Atlatcham, Esq.
Joun Wixinson, M.A., Rector of Broughton Gifford, near
Melksham, and Prebendary of Chardstock, in the Cathedral Church
of Sarum, was born in India, 11th March, 1816, son and grandson
of military officers. He was entered at Wadham College, Oxford,
but was elected a Postmaster of Merton College, 26th June,
1835: afterwards became Fellow, on the Jackson foundation.
He took a third class in Lit. Humaniores, Easter, 1838; B.A.
the same year, Ordained 1839 to the Curacy of St. Thomas’s,
By the Rev. Canon J. EB. Jackson. 235°
Exeter, his Rector being Mr. Medley, who was afterwards Bishop
of Fredericton. Mr. Wilkinson was subsequently an Assistant
Curate at Exmouth, and was presented, in 1848, by Lord Chancellor
Cottenham, to the Rectory of Broughton Gifford.
He took a prominent part in Diocesan educational matters, and
was elected Secretary to the Diocesan Board on the death of Pre-
centor Heathcote. He was also, from the commencement to his
death, one of the examiners every year for the Oxford Middle Class
examinations. At Cheltenham he organized the government of the
College, in 1862, and was a leading member of the Council.
As a magistrate for the county of Wilts he was remarkable for
5 industrious attention to its financial business. He was, indeed, a
man of varied information, clever, accurate and hard-working.
Whatever he undertook, he spared no pains to go “ thorough” with
it. Of our Archeological Society he was an earnest supporter. In
i vols. iii. and iv. are two papers from his pen: “On Parochial
_ Histories :” being an elaborate summary of “Heads of Information”
for the guidance of those who may venture upon that kind of literary
composition. His suggestions embrace almost every conceivable
item of topographical enquiry: and, if only carried out in every
parish, would certainly leave nothing to be desired in the way of
county history. His instructions to others were followed by an ex-
ample in the “ History” of his own parish of Broughton Gifford,
printed in vols. v. and vi. of this Magazine.
Among other publications we may mention :—
1847. Translation of the first thirty Psalms of St. Augustine on the Psalms;
' in the first vol. Library of the Fathers.
ea Systematic Analysis of Bishop Butler’s Analogy. This reached a second
edition, 1853; a third, 1872.
7 1850. Sermon preached at the Visitation of the Archdeacon of Wilts.
1852, Yopular Education. The National Society. The Two Manchester
: Schemes. The Committee of Privy Council.
_ -— Evidence before the Oxford University Commission. In the report of
9 H. M. Commissioners.
| 1856. An Article in the Westminster Review, on Military Education for Officers,
i 1857. A series of Letters and Critique on the Report of the Commissioners on
f Foreign Military Systems of Education. In the Daily News.
_ 1861, Prize Essay on the Farming of Hampshire and the [sle of Wight. In
twenty-second yol. of the Royal Agricultural Society.
82
236 Memoir of George Matcham, Esq.
1869, Introduction to Murray’s Hand-Book for Wilts, Dorset and Somerset.
He also partly edited the book.
—— Evidence before the Commissioners appointed to enquire into the Em-
ployment of Children in Agriculture and Education in Rural Districts :
printed in their Report.
1878. School Boards in Country Parishes. A Letter to the Bishop of Man-
chester
1874. Two Letters on University Reform.
1877, An article “‘ John Wyclif at Oxford,” in Church Quarterly Review, No.
ix., Oct. finished just before his death.
He died 5th September, 1876, in his sixty-first year, and was
buried at Broughton Gifford.
Grorck Martcuam, Esq., of New House, near Downton, Co.
Wilts, seventh in descent from Thomas Matcham, who in 1547
purchased the Manor of Up Wimborne, Co. Dorset, was born 7th
November, 1789: being the eldest son of George Matcham, Esq.,
of Ashford Lodge, in the parish of Slaugham, Co. Sussex, by his
wife Catharine, sister of Horatio, Viscount Nelson the hero of
Trafalear. He was educated at St. John’s College, Cambridge,
where he took the degree of L.L.B. in 1814, and that of L.L.D. in
1820. In 1817 he married Harriet, daughter and heiress of William
Eyre, Esq., of New House: and in 1820 he was appointed a magis-
trate and deputy-lieutenant of the county of Wilts. In 1836 he
succeeded the late Earl of Radnor as Chairman of the Wilts Quarter
Sessions held at Salisbury, an office which he continued to hold
down to April, 1867, when, from age and increasing infirmities, he
resigned it: followed into his retirement by the gratifying assurance
of his brother magistrates, publicly expressed, that they deeply felt
the loss of one of its most able, impartial, and upright servants.
In these pages he is especially entitled to honourable mention, not
only for having taken a share in the labours of the existing Arche-
ological Society, but from the circumstance of his having been (it
is believed) the last survivor of the band of topographers who united
in producing the magnificent volumes of the “ History of Modern
Wiltshire,” which were published at the sole expense and bear the
_ ~
5
By the Rev. Canon J. E. Jackson. 7 237
single name of Sir Richard Colt Hoare, Bart.! In that work the
Hundreds of Downton, in 1833, and Frustfield, in 1844, were
undertaken by Mr. Matcham.
To the Journal of the Archzological Institute of 1849 he con-
tributed a valuable paper on “The Results of Archzological In-
vestigation in Wiltshire,” and “ Remarks on Two Communications
respecting Stonehenge.” To our own Magazine he was an occasional
contributor (see the indexes, vols. viii. and xvi. under his name),
particularly in a lively discussion with the late Mr. Poulett Serope
about the much-disputed site of the Battle of Ethandun. At the
annual meetings and excursions of our Society Mr. Mateham was a
constant attendant. Bad weather or long distance might deter less
zealous archeologists, but both were bravely encountered by the
amiable veteran, who, to the last, took great pleasure in witnessing
the efforts made by a younger generation to unravel obscurities,
which, half a century before, had exercised the wits of his eolleagues
and himself. He died 18th January, 1877, in his eighty-eighth
year.
10f the celebrated topographical gatherings at Stourhead, 1825—1833, an
interesting account from the pen of the late Joseph Hunter, Deputy Keeper of
the Records and Historian of South Yorkshire, is given in the ‘‘ Salisbury
volume,” 1849, of the Archeological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland,p.16.
238
Aofynton any Aritford Churches.
By C. H. Tarpor, Esq.
Downton Cuurcu.!
G muls is a large cruciform church with a central tower.? It
is of considerable interest, and was partially restored in
1860, but it stands in need of further careful restoration. The old
work ranges from Norman to Perpendicular.
The nave has aisles, and arcades of five arches each, It is divided
broadly in its architectural character into two parts. The three
west bays have Norman arches, transitional in so far as they are
pointed ; but, whilst the pillars are of equal height on each side, the
arches on the north are considerably the highest. This difference
probably implies that the latter were built latest, but the exact ex-
planation is not apparent. The two east bays have Early English
arches, those to the south verging on Decorated.
The Norman arcade, on the south side of the nave, has in part
been modernised.* The cap of the west respond is original: the
caps of the two pillars and of the east respond are, I think, modern
imitations, and appear to be generally imitated from those of the
1This church was visited by the Society, on August 25th, 1876. Iam in-
debted to the Key. Prebendary Payne for information kindly supplied to me, ou
subsequent occasions, when I revisited it.
2The tower, which had been raised by the Harl of Radnor, in 1791, was
again reduced in the late restoration to a height which may correspond fairly
with that of the original tower; and this must be a great improvement, as the
tall tower cannot have looked well, and inflicted an unnecessary weight on the
supports. Its upper story is modern, and the parapet and pinnacles, which
crowned Lord Radnor’s tower, have been replaced, as a finish to the reduced
work. These features, as might be anticipated, are of little interest, and do not
add to the attractions of the church.
3 The arch masonry does not show evidences of antiquity, but that I think is
owing to its being concealed by modern work.
Downton Church. 239
north arcade: the shafts and bases appear to be original. In the
north Norman arcade all the caps are original.
It might be supposed that the original nave consisted of the west
part of the present nave, but I rather think that the latter is an
extension of the former, and that the original nave occupied the site
of the two east bays. It is clear, at any rate, that the existing
Norman arcades never extended further east, as they terminate with
responds in that direction, and a pier or portion of wall intervenes
between them and the later work. All traces of the Norman aisles
have disappeared.
Two plain windows in the south wall of the tower have externally —
the appearance of Norman work: they have modern labels added
over them, which disguise them, and make them look modern at
first sight; but I think they are old. One window, in a cor-
responding position on the north side, may be Norman; but, if so,
altered in the head, and with a similar label added: I am more
doubtful about it. Internally these windows have nothing that
shows antiquity! I am inclined to think that the tower was
Norman originally : it is at any rate certain that the transept arches
were cut through older walls. ;
The bowl of the font is Norman, of Purbeck marble, square in’
plan, and ornamented with shallow circular-headed panels on the
sides: the upper part has been pieced with new material.
In the two eastern bays of the nave, the Early English arches, on
the north side, were probably built before those on the south, from
a slight difference in the mouldings; but they formed part of one
general design. There are corbels, at the springing of the arches,
over the central pillars of this Early English work, on their east
sides, for carrying a rood-beam of some kind. I could not examine
these corbels, to see whether they are inserted ; but it is probable,
as rood-lofts were generally late additions. There was a staircase
to the rood-loft, on the north side of the nave, next the tower. It
seems probable, therefore, that, in this instance, the rood-loft may
_ have occupied the whole eastern bay of the nave.
_ 1They have had new lintels added: that on the north may be a modern
___ imitation of those on the south side. reg
. 240 Downton Church.
The aisles of the nave are of unequal width. That on the north.
is the narrowest, being very probably of the width of the original
Norman aisle: I should think it dated from about the beginning of
the fourteenth century, being little removed from Early English in
style: two of the original two-light windows are retained in its
north wall, which has been re-built, and one at the west end: these
are interesting as examples of early cusping. The roof of this aisle
is continuous with that of the nave, as is frequently the case in
churches of the fourteenth century.! The roof of the nave itself is in
the main old, having been of the class in which eueh pair of epposite
rafters are so braced together as to form a separate truss, but without
any tie-beam at their feet. Such a roof might be of the thirteenth
century: here it is probably of the same date as the north aisle.
There are now tie-beams and king-posts, added at intervals, to
strengthen it.
In the south aisle there are two late Decorated doorways, in the
south wall. In both the arch mouldings are continued without
break down the jambs, being convex in the great south door, and
concave in the other and smaller door, near the east end of the aisle.
In the great doorway the door itself is of ancient wood work, probably
of the Perpendicular period. The smaller doorway is disused, and
walled up: it was ‘altered, in the Perpendicular period, by the ad-
dition of a projecting canopy, or shallow porch: in constructing this
porch, the builders seem to have re-used a Decorated arch. The
original concave mouldings of the doorway were altered, on the
lower part of the jambs, particularly on the east side, to a Perpen-
dicular section, and a small niche was cut over the door. This aisle
has been greatly altered throughout in the Perpendicular style, to
which the buttresses, and external string-course—the windows,
which, with the exception of one to the west of the porch, have
been altered and spoiled—and the parapet appear to belong. This
parapet is a good one, faced with flint and stone in alternate squares:
1 There is a good example at Poulshot, where the pier arches are Decorated.
* Called, I believe, a “common rafter” roof: there were some remains of such
a roof in Christian Malford Church, before its restoration, where it must have
been of the thirteenth century.
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 241
it has been raised in modern times by a barbarous addition of brick
above the flint and stoue work, and on this the original coping seems
to have been replaced, so that restoration would be easy. In the
Perpendicular period the aisle appears to have had a low-pitched
leaden roof. The porch, which protects the great south door, is of
little interest: it may perhaps have been part of the Perpendicular
work originally: it bears the date 1648, when it was probably
rebuilt.
In the west wall of the nave there has been a fine window of the
fourteenth century. From the character of the mouldings it must
have been flowing Decorated, probably rather later than the work of
the chancel. It is, and probably always was, of four lights. Un-
fortunately, the tracery has been entirely removed, and the mullions
carried through to the window arch. From the size of the window,
and the sharpness of the arch, it probably was a valuable example,
and it may not be possible now to recover the design.
A Perpendicular west doorway, with a very depressed arch but
good mouldings, has been inserted under this window, in such a
manner as to interfere with the sill, probably in the reign of Henry
VII.: its hood moulding was terminated with carved heads which
have been defaced.
The transepts were originally Early English, but have been con-
siderably altered in the Perpendicular period, when the pitch of the
_ roof was lowered, and the side walls were probably raised. Both
transepts have triplets of lancets'! in their north and south gables,
and a single lancet each in their west walls.2 The south transept
has a richer lancet in its east wall, moulded externally and internally:
__ its superior richness is probably due to its eastward position. Early
English arches open into the transepts from the aisles of the nave,
_ that which communicates with the south aisle having clustered
-1The arch of the triplet in the north transept has been tampered with, and
_ the roundness of the heads of these windows in both transepts is due to a
2 spreading of the masonry, and the insertion of small pieces of stone, to fill the
_ gentre joints which had opened.
_ *That in the south transept has been a good deal restored. A door in the
_ west wall of the north transept I believe to be modern.
24.2 Downton Church.
shafts. In the north wall of the north transept there is a recessed
tomb, of the fourteenth century, with a fine cusped arch and ogee
canopy, but much mutilated, and in the cast wall an early Decorated
piscina. The transept arches, or north and south tower arches, have
been restored with shafts of Early English character, incorrectly,
as I believe: they appear to be late Decorated work, of a common
type, in which the arch mouldings were continued without break
down the jamb: they have been cut through the walls, as I men-
tioned above, and, as the transepts are Early English, must have had
predecessors, probably small, and very likely Norman.
There are, in the east walls of the transepts, some good two-light
windows of Perpendicular character, but without the vertical element
in the tracery—one in the south transept, and two in the north—
which probably succeeded Early English lancets: one of these
windows, next the chancel, is ornamented on the outside with carved
foliage, at the springing of the tracery, which is uncommon.? The
roofs of the transepts are Perpendicular, and very plain. Externally,
the original Early English gable crosses have been replaced on the
transepts, that on the north transept being the richest of the two.
The gable of the south transept has a very heavy coping.’
The west tower arch seems to have been a good deal restored, so
that it is not clear what the original design was: the treatment is
Early English. The east tower arch is richly moulded, and the
jambs have clustered shafts: it seems to have been faithfully re-
stored, and is a fine specimen of Early English work. The chancel,
into which this arch opened, was no doubt much lower than the
1 All the old tower arches were mutilated, and obstructed by modern sub-
arches introduced to support Lord Radnor’s tower: the east and west arches
appear to have been Early English, and the north and south much later work.
2There is an appearance, at first sight, as if the adjacent turret, being part
of the work of the chancel, had been built against the jamb of this window ;
but this is apparent only, as the window is later in style. It was of course
possible to insert the window latest, and a head which forms a stop to the hood
moulding of the window, where it meets the turret, seems to be worked with the
window, and not added, which is conclusive.
* This looks early, but I cannot tell the date.
Ve. oe a
Yr
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 243
present one; but there is no evidence to show whether it was of the
thirteenth century or earlier.!
The finest feature of the church is, undoubtedly, the chancel,
which is Decorated work of excellent character, and it is greatly to
be regretted that it did not come down to us without mutilation.
It has a low-pitched roof, and may be compared with Edington and
Bishopston, being I think the earliest of the three. There are
three windows, of two lights each, in the side walls, and an east
_. window of five lights. It is probable that, as at Edington, and
Bishopston, the side windows were all the same design; but it
happens that the heads and tracery of the central windows only on
each side remained; and, even in these, the ends of the cusps are
restorations. The other side windows are, as I conceive, correctly
restored externally * with the same design. In the case of the east
window, I suppose, the only data for a restoration were the mullions,
which implied a design with some kind of centre piece: an exact
restoration therefore was probably impossible; but I cannot think
1 The arch is not quite central in respect to the present chancel.
' 21s it not possible that the influence of William of Edington, Bishop of
Winchester, may have affected the architecture of all three churches, as the
bishops were lords of Downton and Bishopston ? It is well known that he built
the church of Edington. Some Decorated clerestory windows in the church of
St. Cross, Winchester, of which hospital it seems he was master, in 1334, are
attributed tu him. The first stone of Edington Church was laid in 1352, ard.
the eastern part of that church, being apparently the earliest portion, has some
Perpendicular elements with the retention of a good deal of Decorated feeling.
Between these two dates the Decorated work of Downton and Bishopston may
well lie. The tracery of the side windows of Downton chancel may be con-
_ sidered a mean between ‘‘ Geometrical” and ‘“ Flowing,” —the work at Bishop-
ston, ‘ Flowing,” with a tendency to extravagance, which just misses that of
the Flamboyant,—and at Edington the Perpendicular element first appears.
_ In,Bishop Edington’s work in Winchester Cathedral there is, I believe, no
Decorated element. A somewhat similar suggestion to this was made by the’
late Mr. Matcham, when the Society visited Bishopston, in 1865, (Wilts Mag.,
vol. x., p. 26), viz: that the Decorated portion of that church might have been
erected by William of Wykeham, to which it was objected that the style was
_ too early. I think it is clear that a building erected by Wykeham, after he
_ became bishop, would not be likely to show any Decorated features.
%Internally, their effect is soos by the introduction of keystone corbels to
be noticed later.
A
244 Downton Church.
the tracery of the original"window could have been at all like the
new tracery, which is of a different character from the design of
the side windows.
The westernmost of the three windows on the south side of the
chancel is, I think, the finest specimen of a “low side” window
that I have ever seen : it is not opposite to the corresponding window
on the north side, but placed nearer the tower, perhaps with the in-
tention of keeping it as far as possible from the high altar. The
low opening is formed by continuing down the west light of this
window, and introducing in it a transom in the line of the sill of
the other light: this opening was, I believe, discovered and un-
blocked at the restoration, and the original hinges of an external and
an internal shutter were found 7# situ, and upon them a new shutter
has been hung. Of the other windows on the south side, the central
one corresponds with those on the north, but the sill of the eastern
one is higher, in consequence of the coincidence with it in position
of the sedilia on the inside, and the string-course which runs beneath
the windows externally is raised also.
On the north side of the chancel, there is the “ priest’s door,”
with fine mouldings, and to the east of it another door,' walled up,
from which a passage projected, which communicated with some
other building. I think it likely that it may have led to a vestry,
slightly detached from the chancel; for though in general vestries
adjoin chancels without any interval, such a position entails a dimi-
nution of window space in the chancel wall, which in this instance
it may have been considered desirable to avoid.
Externally, the walls of the chancel are faced with squared flints?
and freestone dressings: on the north side, adjoining the tower,
1This could not have been the door of a mere recess or closet. There has
been a passage, on the removal of which, a stone left projecting on a buttress
of the chancel has been cut away to match the adjacent string, as may be seen
on examination.
2The flints in the chancel walls are approximately, but of course not very
exactly, squared: in the transept walls they are not squared at all. The put-
log holes in the chancel are formed by three pieces of dressed freestone, on
the sides and top, accurately squared: in the north transept they seem to have
been formed in a similar manner, but more rudely.
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 245
there is a turret containing the staircase to the tower, and originally
entered from the interior of the transept: both chancel and turret
probably had, or were intended to have, a parapet, which might re-
semble the later flint and stone parapet of the south aisle.
The sedilia have been a good deal restored, with new carving,
having probably been much mutilated, so that it is difficult to judge
of their original merit: they have been restored with four seats, but
obviously the correct restoration would be three seats and a piscina :
to the east of what was the piscina is an ambry.
Of a string-course which runs beneath the windows internally, but
a small portion is original, and from that the remainder has been
restored.
This chancel has always had a wooden roof: the original corbels which
supported it, with one exception, remain: they are situated between
the side windows, and adjoining the end walls, and are finely carved.
A most unfortunate alteration of the design was introduced at the
restoration, when additional corbels were made at the points of the
windows, like keystones, and worked in with the mouldings of their
arches: to do justice to the design of the original builders, these
must be ignored. One of the old corbels, the second from the east
on the south side, had been left uncarved: it would have been well,
if it had so remained, to tell its own tale : it is now a modern corbel,
out of harmony with the others, and of no interest. There is
evidence, at the east end, of a slight alteration of the design, by the
original builders, there being in the angles corbels, at a low level,
with shafts springing from them; but, for some reason, this work
was abandoned, the shafts stopped abruptly, and other corbels in-
troduced above. If the original roof had remained to our time, it
_ would probably have heen a valuable example. Before the restoration
there were, I am told, four great beams, corresponding with the.
_ corbels, which were hidden by a ceiling: these may perhaps have
belonged to the original roof.
There are in the chancel several monuments of the last century to
members of the Duncombe family.
There is a hagioscope, on the south side of the chancel arch,.
which may have been cut through at a late date: it does not point
246 Downton and Britford Churches.
to the site of the high altar, and it is suggested that it was used for
viewing, from the chancel, an altar in the transept. Another hagio-
scope was found in the north wall of the chancel, but was not left
open.
There is, in the churchyard, on the south side of the church, the
fine and tall octagonal shaft of a cross,! set on circular steps: the
cap of the shaft remains and appears to be of the fourteenth century,
but the actual cross is gone: there is a head carved at the north-east
angle of the base, the only angle that has been carved.
Interments have been found on the vicarage premises, due north
of the chancel : probably its site was formerly part of the churchyard.
I am told that, in the house called the old parsonage, west of the
vicarage, a medieval window was found with an ogee arch, but
closed up again.
Britrorp Cuvurcu.?
[That portion of the following notes on Britford Church, which
refers to the Saxon arches, formed in the main the substance of a
letter written to the editor of the Salisbury and Winchester Journal,
on the 30th of January, of the present year. It has since been
printed in a condensed form in the Journal of the British Archzo-
logical Association,? with slight additions, and is here reproduced
almost verbatim. By permission of the Council of the Association,
and with the consent of the artist, I am enabled to reproduce in
these pages a photolithographic illustration of the north arch,
which appeared in the Journal of the Association, vol. xxxil., p.
497.]
Britford Church is an aisleless cruciform building of moderate size,
1 There is the base and part of the shaft of another cross in the street, opposite
the ‘‘ White Horse” Inn: an inscription testifies that it was ‘‘ restored’ in
1797: it is now greatly dilapidated: it may have been originally of the four-
teenth century.
2 This church was visited by the Society, on September 16th, 1870, before its
restoration, and again on August 25th, 1876.
S Vol. xxxiii., p. 345.
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 247
which was well restored by Mr. Street, in 1873. It is mainly a
Decorated work of the fourteenth century, but there are in the nave
remains of much earlier date, Saxon! in character, which form the
most interesting feature of the church. These consist of three
arches, whereof two are situated in the north and south walls of the
nave, close to its east end. While they remained walled up ® they
long ago attracted attention, as they were visible externally, and
‘were described as Saxon by Rickman. The third arch isin the
south wall of the nave, near the west end, but this does not re-
main in anything like the same state of preservation as the two for-
mer, and was only discovered when the church was restored. Its
remains now form internally * part of the south doorway of the nave.
The two arches, opposite each other, at the east end of the nave,
were not doorways nor transept arches, but I think the church
originally had aisles into which they opened. There is a general
similarity between the two, but at the same time so much difference
as to make me conelude that one was erected before the other. I
think it probable that the work went on very slowly, and that the
style changed as it proceeded. The south archway must be the
earlier. An illustration of it is given at page 79 of Parker’s edition
of Rickman, published in 1862. Its arch is, as is there stated, .
turned with the flat tiles called Roman bricks, and is the only arch
of the three so constructed. There is one feature common to both
arches. Two flat pilasters are affixed to the face of each jamb, four
in all. In the case of the south arch these are perfectly plain, and
are fixed in a peculiar manner. There is a large flat stone as a base
to the jamb, and another such stone as impost, of the width of the
Cees:
1T may be regarded as begging the question in calling the work Saxon. I
have been obliged to modify my opinion about it more than once ; but I have
altered my views to suit the facts, and not taken liberties with the facts to suit
a theory.
?That is, until 1873. No one previously could have inferred the elaborate
character of the north arch. Since they have been opened out, small annexes
have been built, so as to bring them entirely within the church, and enable.
them to be readily examined in every part.
’The exterior of this doorway and the porch are new. Before the restoration
the church had a western door.
248 | Britford Church.
brick arch. These project from the face of the wall, and the pilasters
are let into mortices' cut in the base and impost. It is therefore
clear that these pilasters cannot have been added after the arch was
in position.? In the illustration in Parker’s Rickman the edge of
the pilasters is shown, and they appear to have imposts of their own,
distinct from the rest of the jambs, but this is not the case. The
divisions in the imposts are not joints but cracks, due to the settle-
ment of the jambs, which caused the resistance of the pilasters to
break the impost. A narrow strip of stone, projecting like a hood-
moulding, ran round the arch, and was continued down to the
ground, forming a limit to the ornament of the archway, the width
of the arch itself having apparently determined the design. The
included portion of the jamb, being constructed mainly of stone, was
decorated by three bricks, projecting, but with less projection than
the base, impost, and limiting strip. These are hardly indicated in
the illustration above-mentioned. The soffit of the arch is orna-
mented with three squares of stone which do not project. These
appear to have been built with the arch and not inserted. We have
thus in this arch a rude attempt at decoration by contrast of colour
and form.
This system of decoration is greatly developed in the north arch.
Tn its case the pilasters are not let into mortices, but held up by the
strength of the mortar and the pressure on the impost. They have
base-mouldings, above which those on the east jamb are elaborately
ornamented with carving, representing apparently a vine. The arch
is constructed with rectangular pieces of stone and red tiles in a
very remarkable manner, the latter forming the back of sunk panels,
and also being disposed in a cruciform pattern amongst the stone.
Two of the lowest stones of the arch are formed like corbels for
some use which I do not understand. These tiles and stones, set
with their broad surfaces in a direction tangential to the curve of
1This looks as if the builders were more used to building with timber than
stone.
2 The arch itself has been pronounced Roman, that is, earlier than these pilasters.
If this were so, it would follow that it must have been moved bodily and placed
upon the jambs.
ae, ee ee
|
.
SAXON ARCH,BRITFORD CHURCH, WILTS.
ete
f ROMAN MAIGR.
THE SHADEO PARTS
APREBENT (LAT foman
Jreeoer ar B ORCS APPRRANTAY 3
weno FOR AN ErrEcT OF
cove
THE OrrasiT a (on waar)
swe HAR WO PATTERNS
ACEP ONE PINES OnET
Basa nrA
INNER VIEW or vax NORTH ARCH or NAVE
By ©. H. Talbot, Esq. 249
the arch, appear to form its whole thickness. Immediately round
it runs as before a narrow strip of stone, projecting like a hood-
moulding, which cannot add to the strength, as it is only slightly
let into the wall! This strip continues down the jamb, close to the
edge of the pilaster, and in this case the impost necessarily bonds
beyond it into the wall. The faces of the jambs are ornamented by
the introduction of squares of stone, filling at intervals the space :
between the pilasters. This necessarily leaves a series of sunk panels
which are backed with red tiles. Tbe stones are carved with the
vine and interlacing bands. On the west jamb the only carving that
occurs is on one of these square stones, showing plainly that the
carving was all executed after the work was built, and was never
finished. Two stones at the bottom of the jambs are puzzling.
They have the form of bases of pilasters. Possibly they may be
insertions,’ but this is very doubtful.
The third arch differed very much from the other two. There
are indications of the design of its north side. As far as I can
judge it was entirely of stone, the arch being formed of a thin course
of stones. On the face of the jamb there are remains of a projecting
pilaster, worked on the same stones as the rest of the jamb. Its
angle is finished with a slight hollow which runs down and at the
. base is curved outwards till it becomes horizontal. The rest of the
pilaster is cut away, but I presume it was symmetrical. There is a
groove in the soffit of the arch, apparently for the insertion of a
sub-arch corresponding with this pilaster. This was probably for
1Tt is shown, in the drawing, in section, as having a considerable bond, and
as not projecting ; but it is evident that it did project throughout, on both sides
of the arch, though much of it has been cut away ; also, that it had hardly any
bond, as may be seen in one place where a tile has been chipped away for its
insertion. Moreover, in the drawing, the tile at the crown of the arch, given
in section, is not shown quite in its right place. It should be higher, as it forms
the back of a sunk panel.
2They are very similar to such bases as the pilasters of the third or south-
west arch must have had. That they project over the chamfer worked on the
plinth beneath them, would seem to imply that they are insertions, but there is
no other sign of insertion. Possibly they may be examples of a design aban-
doned almost as soon as begun.
VOL. XVII.—NO. L, 7D
250 Britford Church.
the purpose of keeping the arch stones in their places. The work
has been so cut about as to make it difficult to recover the original
design. This archway had at some period been converted into a
doorway, when a cut was made in the jamb for dropping in a bar.
At a later date it was walled up, and was re-opened at the late
_ restoration.
I think it probable that there may have existed formerly a fourth
arch, opposite to this one, near the west end of the north wall, and
that four may have been the whole number. The chureh must have
had a chancel of some kind, possibly an apse. It is not unlikely
that the nave and aisles of this early church may have remained,
comparatively unaltered, till the great conversion of the church in
the fourteenth century, when the present tower (exclusive of the
upper part which is modern), transepts, and chancel were built, and —
the nave altered, and that then the aisles of the early church were
removed.
In the two south arches, but not in the north arch, are marks
where iron bars have been fixed in the masonry, the insertion of
which was not part of the original work. This seems to show that
at one time the south aisle was shut off by a grating or grille.
It is necessary also to notice the character of the mortar. In the
south archway the tile arch has very wide joints of pink mortar,
made with pounded brick. It so happens that on the jambs both
inside and out, where the joints are tolerably wide, a good deal of
the mortar has been picked out or fallen out, and in what remains
I could only in one place trace a slight indication of pounded brick ;
but the examination has been rendered difficult owing to the fact
that the whole inner or north side of the archway has been washed
over with some pink colour, probably in medieval times. However,
this colouring is confined to that side, and at a point beneath the
arch where the impost is broken away I observed, by the red stain
on that part of the pilaster which has been laid bare by the fracture,
that it was fixed into the mortice in the impost with the same pink
mortar, the lower edge of the stain corresponding exactly with the
under side of the broken impost. This joint is a very close one.
In the north arch all the joints are very close, and I observed there
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 251
generally the same pink colour of the mortar and also small frag-
ments of broken brick. In the third arch I could not detect the
original mortar at all.
As I mentioned above, all the rest of the ancient work is Decorated,
of the fourteenth century, with the exception of an altar-tomb and
canopy, and some old wood-work in the chancel, which are Perpen-
dicular. The nave is lit by a series of two-light windows, at a high
level, in the side walls, the authority for the design of which was
given by some stones of a window near the porch, remaining 7 situ.
The high level of these windows was a necessity owing to the fact
that the Saxon arches were not removed but only blocked. The west
window I believe to be entirely new. The chancel is, I should say,
a little later than the nave owing to the prevalence of the ogee
curve in the heads of the windows. The tower arches are of the
same period, perfectly plain, and springing from the walls without
shafts or corbels. There is a piscina in each transept, implying the
. former presence of an altar, and in the west wall of the south tran-
sept there is a horizontal squint through which the altar in that
transept could be viewed from the exterior of the church. There
are several squints' of that shape in the neighbourhood of Salisbury.
The north window of the north transept is modern, introduced before
the late restoration, of Decorated character, but not in accordance
with the original Decorated work of the church.
I am told that there is authority for the restoration of all the win-
dows in the chancel, the tracery of the east window having been found
blocking up a window on the north side, so that though we have a
good deal of new work we have in effect the design of the old
chancel. There is a low-side window on the south side, and there
was another on the north side, which has been removed, as a new
vestry has been added there, and the place of the window is occupied
by an arch of communication with the chancel. The sedilia and
piscina are curiously contrived in the sill of the easternmost window
- 1One, in West Harnham Church, is to the best of my recollection in a similar
position, but opening from a porch into the transept. There are also squints of
such a form, but fur other uses, in at last two of the Canons’ houses in the Close
q of Salisbury.
7 2
Bag Britford Church.
on the south side, the sill rising by three steps or breaks in its level
which constituted the three seats, and the recess for the piscina
being formed in the splay of the east jamb. The stone has been so
much cleaned that it might be supposed new, but the arched canopy
of the piscina is unsymmetrical, a peculiarity which would hardly
be introduced in new work, and I am informed that the whole is a
strict restoration.!. The basin of the piscina, which must have been
sunk in the stone which formed the highest seat, has not been re-
stored. On the north side of the chancel is the well-known altar-
tomb which formerly was supposed to be that of Henry Stafford,
Duke of Buckingham, who was executed in the reign of Richard III.
(1483), a theory which appears to be now discredited. I have not
gone into the question of the authentication of this tomb. It is
backed by an ogee canopy of late character, and there seems to be
no accordance between the base-mouldings of the canopy and those
of the tomb itself. This may perhaps bear out the statement, in
Brown’s Guide to Salisbury, that the tomb was removed from De
Vaux College to its present site, in so much as the tomb and canopy
do not appear to belong to each other. The canopy has the appearance
of having belonged to a tomb recessed in a wall, though I know of
no evidence that there ever was such a recess here. One of the old
Decorated windows was found behind it and restored, and conse-
quently part of the canopy now stands detached from the wall, which
does not produce a very happy effect. Such an altar-tomb as this
would as a rule stand against a wall without any canopy.
A small effigy, of Purbeck marble, was found during the res-
toration, and is now placed on the sill of a window on the north
side of the chancel. It is in two pieces, and represents a male
figure holding the stem of a cup. The cup, of which the upper part
is broken, appears from its form not to be a chalice, and the figure
from the absence of tonsure is believed not to be a priest. It is
probably of the fourteenth century, and is an interesting example
of that class of dwarf effigies to which the so-called “ boy bishop ”
1This recess is so bare now that it is possible it may originally have had some
ornamental features which have entirely disappeared.
——-
7
:
‘Supposed Stone-Circle near Abury. 253
in Salisbury Cathedral belongs. There remained in the church
before its restoration portions of old seats of Perpendicular character
with carved poppy-heads, the best of which have been replaced in
the new fittings of the chancel. One has a sprig of a tree issuing
from a tun, a rebus which is probably Ashton,! with an inscription.
Another elegant poppy-head, apparently a lily, has been copied.
There are also, preserved in the vestry, a number of paving tiles in
a very worn state, many of which seem to be of unusual design.
The family mausoleum of the Earl of Radnor, which lies to the
north of the chancel and parallel to it, has been lowered as much as
was possible consistently with not disturbing the interments. For-
merly, I think, it over-topped the chancel, and decidedly detracted
from the effect of the church. Ifa higher pitch could be given to
the roof of the nave, and the upper part of the tower could be re-
modelled externally, the appearance of the whole building would be
much improved.
To the north-west of the church is a picturesque brick and stone
building, with mullioned windows, which I understand to have been
formerly the parsonage house.
Supposed Stone-Cirele near Aburp.
SZTASNE mile south of Silbury the wanderer over the down in that
\ (0 4 district may have noticed a few sarsen stones lying scattered
in an irregular line on the brow of a hill commanding a full view of
Silbury to the north, with Abury beyond it.
A close examination of these stones some years ago caused me to
suspect that though now overthrown, and so moved from their
original position, they must have once formed the segment of a large
circle. But though I have many times visited them, and speculated
on their probable intention, it was not till this autumn, when a more
17¢ has been suggested to me that the rebus may stand for Baynton, as one
| _ of that family had the Britford manor for a few years as trustee. The foliage
however appeared rather to be that of an ash.
254 Supposed Stone-Circle near Abury.
careful scrutiny resulted in my finding four other stones peeping
just above ground, and certain faint indications of a trench, all of
which would come within the supposed circle, that I determined to
examine the ground more searchingly with the probe and the spade.
Accordingly having obtained the ready permission of the owner,
the Rev. Robert Ashe, and the cordial consent of the occupier, Mr.
Pinniger, and having happily secured the valuable assistance of one,
who by his admirable treatises on Abury and Stonehenge, has earned
the title of a master in British antiquities (Mr. William Long), I
set a careful man to dig early one morning in September last; and
guided by the stones which appeared above ground, and the mark
of the trench, we triumphantly vindicated our impression that it was
a circle, by unearthing in that one day no less than twenty-two
sarsen stones, lying from two to twelve inches below the surface.
That these stones, though generally very small, were manifestly
placed in the position they now occupy, in many cases nearly touching
one another, and that they formed part of a large circle, is (I think)
unmistakable. What that circle was, and what was its probable
intention, I will not now discuss. Enough for the present that we
have proved its existence; that the area it occupied is very large,
with a diameter of about ninety yards; that the traces of the entire
circle are by no means complete ; and that subsequent days’ diggings
have as yet revealed but four more stones, none of which come within
the exact circle.
It is my intention to continue the examination, when the weather
will allow on that most exposed down. I only make mention of the
investigation now, before it is completed, in order that, while the
stones are yet uncovered, any one who desires to do so, may visit
the spot, and form his own opinion of the circle, which may
readily be found by following the waggon-track nearly opposite
Silbury, on the Beckhampton side, and continuing dwe south till the
stones are reached.
A. C. Smura.
Yatesbury Rectory,
October 24th, 1877. ;
H, F, & E, BULL, Printers and Publishers, 4, Saint John Street, Devizes.
ee
THE
WILTSHIRE
MAGAZINE,
Contents,
Esq., M.A., Honorary Secretary of the Wiltshire Society (founded
Ree cnr v ncaa dor dase ies-cassenscc®, tah
DEVIZES:
H. F. & E. Bunn, 4, Saint Jonn Sreeer.
| Archeological ond Batwral Wistory
No. LI. MARCH, 1878. Vo.. XVII.
PAGE
255
282
306
327
336
347
364
Bs J Ss » eee 2 a"
rae ie tar ‘ i =...
¥ ff j =
* es Lee
7 ae } a Tats igs +? i er i Pe By “uy
~ ¥ my .
ee a: ae NGS a nici
= Swi wy bip adie Mitte: on 4 box im ieee
. ‘ aoe : oe ye ‘
24) Feit ier os)
‘ 2 ; a
» or-¢ ¥ ots ~ if party Ofte z i
ive: ioe waa > Bret ORAM |
‘]
1
a
od
—
we
- -
be 9
3
0 PR TT, TA LD iV sand wrato 7] «Tt
J y bP ‘ 4 4 > ‘
Che cL, ie ee A le aS
4 a j a = 9
, Yoneda Ses Geniey
DORK. sorony ies eee eT ae Eee Cee
\ Sere ver ome SP sik cis oh
TOI Ht P niet oF PA re daa heat Sie go: 3¢G
ate (ite needa fe sible ee Ww vst ;
hoy i watt. Pagar 1a Tages o 11, Ant 40 3M oRrzo cr aaa
W ar 42 eeoDU A AtraN MAY rar rests WY at rn
“Le gregh Tay! ata a uindial’ 33 “fl t ita Erbs
AL 56 TEE pert a wry vi YH ive ends VW i Pea tod wa
«| Vi dew igen a? arteteabeor tf ae ai? Jo, Yh
*
WILTSHIRE MAGAZINE
‘SMULTORUM MANIBUS GRANDE LEVATUR ONOS.”—Ovid,
THE TWENTY-FOURTH ANNUAL MEETING
OF THE
Wiltshire Archeological & Natural Mistory Society,
HELD AT WARMINSTER,
Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday, August 22nd, 23rd and 2Ath,
1877.
PRESIDENT OF THE MEETING, ~
Tre Most HonovrasLte THe Margquis or Batu.
jamersTiE General Annual Meeting! for 1877 was held at War-
minster, which had not been visited by the Society for
twenty-one years. A very large number of Members and their
friends attended; the weather proved most favourable, and nothing
could have exceeded the kindly and hospitable reception which the
inhabitants of Warminster gave to the Society. The Meeting was
in all respects thoroughly successful, and we suspect that in future
so long an interval will not be allowed to exist between the visits of
_ the Archzologists to Warminster.
It was not deemed advisable on this occasion to form a temporary
local museum, but on the walls of the Town Hall were displayed a
_ number of valuable and interesting letters, discovered last year in a
Jumber room at Pyt-House, and kindly lent for the oecasion by the
_ owner, V. F. Benett-Stanford, Esq., M.P. They consisted of
several manuscript letters of King Charles I. to Prince Rupert; an
_1In preparing this account of the Warminster Meeting the Editor desires to
___ acknowledge the assistance he has derived from the columns of the Devizes
_ Gazette, the Wiltshire Mirror, the Salisbury Journal and the Somerset and
Wilts Journal.
— -VOL, XVII.—NO. LI. U
256 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
autograph letter of King Charles II. during his exile in Paris in
1653; an autograph letter of Jacob, Lord Astley, to Prince Rupert
in 1645; an autograph letter of Prince Rupert, 1666; and an auto-
graph jetter of Henry IV. of France and Navarre, 1553. There
was also an old engraving of Boscobel House, where King Charles
II. was concealed after the Battle of Worcester: and there was a patent
of nobility to Jean Baptiste Curto, signed by King Joseph Bonaparte,
and captured from his carriage by General Sir Henry Fane; G.C.B.,
at the Battle of Vittoria, June 2lst, 1813. These were all in ad-
mirable preservation, several of them beautifully written, and well
protected under glass and in suitable frames.
The proceedings opened at the Town Hall (which was tastefully
draped for the occasion, and decorated with flowers and evergreens),
at half-past two o’clock on Wednesday, August 22nd, with the
following
ADDRESS BY THE PRESIDENT
of the Meeting, the Marquis of Bath :—
Upon the former occasion of your visit to Warminster, in 1856,
when you did me the honour of choosing me as your President, I
was unable from some engagement to be present at the opening of
the proceedings, and was obliged to ask your late vicar, Mr. Fane,
to act as my representative. For reasons with which you are ac-
quainted, I am now called upon in 1877 to do for another that which
in 1856 another did for me. Though I should have been more
pleased if the mantle of Sir John Lubbock had fallen upon some
one better qualified to wear it, I proceed to discharge the duty that
devolves to me by, in the first place, offermg you my hearty con-
gratulations upon your revisiting this neighbourhood after so long
an interval as twenty-one years. The Society indeed, returns, but
not quite the same individually. Many of its earlier and more
prominent members who came here before, have passed away alto-
gether; and yet not altogether, for they have left in the pages of
the Wiltshire Magazine proofs of the interest they took in the objects
and the welfare of the Society, and therefore though no longer
present with us, they have xo¢ vanished from our grateful recollect-
ions, Perhaps there is none whose loss will be more regretted, or
ge ENA RRNA ig
The President’s Address. Q57
whose presence will be so much missed as that of our old friend, Mr.
George Matcham. We may congratulate ourselves, however, in
seeing among us one whom I may describe as being, so far as this
- Society is concerned, a link between the present and the past, who
contributed so much to the success of the former, who will contribute
I hope little less to the prosperity of the present meeting here, one
who has acquired a well-deserved reputation, as among the best of
English Archxologists—the Rev. Canon Jackson, the first and for
many following years, the manager of the Magazine, and one of the
principal supporters of this and so many other meetings. To him
and to others, I must leave the duty of pointing out to you the
principal objects to be looked at during your excursions, and avail
myself of the opportunity to offer a few remarks upon the subject of
archeological science generally.
Every kind of research that helps to bring out the ancient history
of the institutions under which we live—-our language, laws, customs,
arts, science, or religion, comes under the head and falls within the
scope of Archeology. So, taking a general view of the many
different researches that are now being carried on into antiquity,
what is the result? It is, that all who are so employed, are con-
tributing, more or less, and assisting one another, in throwing light
upon the history of the land we live in.
Take, in so very broad a subject, an example or two. Say, the
_ Archeology of Language—rather an important step towards any
History. Here we have first, Words. Then, Words combined and
variously pronounced become Tongues and Dialects. It is, I fancy,
true enough, that most people not only call places by familiar
names, without knowing what those names are derived from: but
that we use our common speech, as we use the common air, or the
common coin of the realm: as a convenient medium provided, some-
how or other, for handy exchange, and nothing more. But the truth
is that there is a great deal of curious History concealed in names
and words of every kind. Without going a long way off, does
everybody here know the meaning of “ Warminster’ which has
nothing to do with war?—of “Clay-hill,” where there is no clay?
—of ‘“Coal-harbour,” where there is neither coal, nor a harbour?
u2
258 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
—of “ Cold-kitchen-hill,’” which may be cold enough at times, but
where there is no kitchen that I am aware of. I mentioned coin
just now. Most people understand what pounds, shillings, and
pence are, but not why they are so called. There is, in fact, not
only much that is amusing, but also much that is instructive in the
Archeology -of Words. But there is something more important
still. Our common speech, like the coin of the realm, wears out,
and requires to be renewed from time to time, as the value and
meaning become effaced. The changes and defects which Time and
use have produced in the English language, are now being rectified
by those who are employed in revising the English translation of
the Bible. Time has so altered the use, and therefore the meaning,
of words, that there are many in our present translation, which bear,
to modern ears, a sense very different from, and, in some cases,
exactly the contrary of that which they conveyed at the time when
the translation was made. Biblical scholars, then, are Archzologists
of a very important kind, engaged in a most delicate task, in which
they carry with them the sympathy and the best wishes of all
thoughtful people. In this department you have some of our most
eminent scholars and critics employed. Others are associated in re-
producing the text of our earliest English writers; in correcting
and elucidating that of Chaucer and Shakespeare, two men who
have done, perhaps, more than all others towards settling the English
language. There are also, in almost every country, industrious
antiquaries forming glossaries and vocabularies of provincial words.
From single Words the next step is to Dialects and Tongues. Here
you have again very eminent archeologists at work, such as Pro-
fessor Max Miiller and Prince Lucien Bonaparte, whose labours
bring us up into a higher study, that of Ethnology, or the history
and connection of nations.
Take another example of the use of archxological research: the
case of History. Much of this must always be taken at second-
hand, from older writers or chroniclers, who, in their day copied
from those who lived before them; and if any new history of an old
period is now written, it will be (in some measure at any rate),
owing to fresh matter having been discovered; which, when carefully
The President's Address. 259
weighed and put together, corrects the former accounts or presents
them in a different light. But where does the fresh information
come from? From records and documents that have been disin-
terred. This brings out another kind of archeologist, viz., the
Palezographer or decipherer of ancient writing. He, being able to
read it, supplies the raw material. The historian works it up.
I come now to another very important contributor to the history
of the land we live in, in the person of what I may venture to
eall the “ Pickaxe Archeologist.” There are, in the history of
our own country, some periods about which it is now hopeless to
discover any written reeord whatever, beyond what is already known
to exist. One period more particularly, is the time during which
Britain was part of the old Roman Empire. We all know that
(speaking in round numbers) Britain was for four hundred years
a Roman province, kept under controul by Roman officers and
legions, much in the same way as we now govern India. Four hun-
dred years is a very long time indeed ; and it admits of a great deal
being done, and a great deal being written. But if we enquire,
how much remains to us of contemporary history, that is to say,
actually written about Britain at any time during those four hundred
years, it consists, I believe, of a few pages of Casar’s Commentaries,
a short biography of Agricola, by Tacitus, a few detached extracts
from other Latin or Greek authors, and an Itinerary, or road-book,
of Antoninus. The whole might be printed so as to fill a Times
newspaper and supplement, with perhaps an “ outer-sheet,” any one
morning. That is, literally, all that is left to us,in dooks, of the history
of our country, during four hundred years. Now we know a good
deal more about Roman Britain than what one “ Zimes and supplement
and outer sheet ” would contain, but for the rest we are indebted to
the “ Pickaxe Archeologist.” I permit, by the way, the plough
and the shovel to partake of the honour. We have considerable
_ remains of Roman towns, as at Silchester and Wroxeter, both of
which are well-known to us by being excavated. We turn up in
our fields, a few feet under the surface (as at Pitmead, near this place,
and at Whatley, near Frome, and a hundred other places), the sites
of Roman villas, and come upon tesselated pavements, coins, and
260 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
the like. We find, all over Britain, similar remains; also thousands
of inscribed stones, altars and various memorials. Roman inserip-
tions are proverbially brief and terse, but the quantity of information
obtained from them when brought together is very great. From
them we learn all about the military occupation, and many curious
facts about the religion that obtained; how the Romans, always
tolerant, endeavoured to conciliate British prejudices by combining
the national heathenism of Britain with their own. This, and a
great deal more, of whieh we have no account, is gathered from the
discoveries made by what I may call Pickaxe Archeology. It has
sometimes been said that these diggings, however amusing, never
bring anything to light that is of practical use. Mr. J. C. Bruce,
in one of the archzological publications, took up this challenge and
showed several instances in which we might save ourselves much
trouble and expense by following Roman example. It would teach
us the importance of good roads. Again, as to the warming of
our houses. Coals and wood are a heavy item in housekeeping,
because we persist in allowing two-thirds of the heat to go up the
chimney. The Roman villas show us how, at a quarter of the ex-
pense, they warmed by underground pipes. Our mortar, again, very
often consists of a small allowance of lime, and a large one of useless
road-dirt, and in a few years the walls want fresh pointing if not
fresh building. The Roman mortar is so hard that it is broken with
more difficulty than the brick or stone. A prisoner in an English
gaol can sometimes pick his way out with an iron nail, but Roman
mortar would have baffled him. Again, in building a brick arch,
which we have always done with bricks of the same shape, filling up
with mortar, it was only lately discovered, by some excavation of a
barrelled drain, that the Romans used wedge-shaped bricks. It is
only within a few years that we have insisted upon extra-mural in-
terment in cemeteries. But near the city of Bath, I am informed
that many Roman tombs have been discovered by the sides of the
Roman ways leading out of the city, showing that they were before
us in this wholesome improvement, even in our own country, fifteen
hundred years ago. I do not say that they were ahead of us in
everything, but that they were so in some things we know, and we
The President’s Address. 261
have Jearned it by the aid of our practical archeology. One thing
in speaking of this particular period is very remarkable. How came
all the Roman civilization of those four hundred years to be lost ?
sor lost it was. As soon as they left Britain, the immediate and
first proceeding seems to have been utterly to have effaced every
vestige of them. So many of the Roman villas bear marks of fire,
that it is to be inferred that they were purposely burnt. In the city
ef Bath, well known to them as it is to us, used by them for its hot
springs, and embellished by them with fine temples, it was discovered
a few years ago, in digging the ground for a new hotel, that the
level of the old Roman city was covered with heaps of-rubbish, drift
wood, and even peat, as if it had been purposely abandoned to utter
neglect, and allowed to return to a state of nature. It is certainly
curious (as I have already observed) that nothing whatsoever of those
four hundred years should have been bequeathed to us in the way of
_ history, except so much as would fill a newspaper : nothing in the
forms of towns and villas, but what seems to have been instantly
destroyed; and yet after an interval of fourteen or fifteen centuries,
we find ourselves in this very Britain, brought up, as it were from
eur cradle, to love anything that has a flavour of classical Rome.
For this revived taste, and for the boon of Latin grammar, we have
to thank, not the old Britons, who, after the Roman four centuries,
let everything run to waste again, but our Teutonic ancestors—the
Anglo-Saxons who followed them, and who, when the Roman Em-
pire was broken up in the West, brought the Latin tongue back into
this country along with their own. Those Teutonic ancestors, the
Anglo-Saxons who prevailed for, say six hundred years, down to the
Norman Conquest, have in their turn, left plenty of work for arche-
ologists of every description. Again we cannot but wonder at the
enormous amount of record and of history, that has absolutely per-
ished. I may be allowed, I hope, to say that I am glad to see in
the programme that your attention is to be called on Thursday, by
Mr. Baron, to “The Study of, Anglo-Saxon and its value to the
Archeologist,” so I leave you in his hands for that long period and °
pass on to say that even from the time when William I. succeeded
them down to the reign of Henry III.—(call it one hundred and fifty
262 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
years—again a very long period)—there is, so to speak, very little, I
believe, left to us of contemporaneous document. Still when such
relics do come to light, our students of old handwriting, the paleo-
graphers, assure us that documents of that period are in every way
superior to those of the nineteenth century. The material was
stouter, the vellum almost indestructible, the ink infinitely blacker ;
the handwriting beautifully large, plain, and legible; last of all the
deeds connected with property delightfully brief and portable. As
we come down later, written records are more plentiful, but the con-
tents are rather more difficult to get at, as the writing grows worse
and worse.
You are perhaps aware, that during the last few years great
assistance has been given to students in this branch of archeol-
ogical science by the improved preservation of our National Records,
and the easier access that is allowed to them. It is not very credit-
able to us that our National Records had been so long neglected as
they were. In one of the earliest Reports of the Commission appointed
to enquire into their condition, there is a description of the state
they were found in. Some were in the Tower of London; some
were in the Chapter House, Westminster: some in vaults in the
Houses of Parliament,—so damp that they were perishing ; and the
first step necessary was to employ rat-catchers and terriers to kill
the vermin and clear the ground from enemies. In the Chapter
House at Westminster on the upper floor the records filled old de-
cayed wooden book-cases, and underneath, on the ground-floor, lived
a washerwoman, whose fire might at any moment have burnt up
Domesday Book itself, which actually lodged up-stairs. All this
has now been rectified. A new Record Office has been built,
everything transferred into it, and every facility is given for historical
research. There has also been a Royal Commission appointed, under
whose direction, of course with permission of owners, enquiry has
been made into repositories of documents in private houses, or in the
possession of Corporations and Colleges, for the purpose of ascertain-
ing what they contain of public and national interest. Six folio
volumes of their Reports have been printed, presenting valuable
epitomes of what has been found. It by no means follows, however,
The President’s Address. 263
because a vast quantity of old documents lying safely put away in
the chests of their proprietors have been aired by exhibition to the
eA
<a.
ug
rapid glances of a Commissioner, that there is to burst all at once
upon the world a flood of light as to the Past. Such things require
minute inspection before any, if any, importance can be attached to
them. Rare historical documents may, or may not, be found. But
speaking generally, it is impossible to say what is really of impor-
tance and what is not, until some accidental circumstance arises to
create its importance. Nobody would ever have dreamt that in
1877 a passage in Czxsar’s Commentaries (one of the few literary
fragments of Roman occupation in Britain), would be of any use in
settling a dispute involving money in 1877. Yet only the other
day, in our courts of law, there was a cause about a certain bridge-
way on the banks of the Thames, near Oatlands, in Surrey—the
question being whether Kent or Surrey was to repair it. The legal
dispute was enlivened by bringing into court Czesar’s Commentaries;
_ the roadway by which Cesar advanced to cross the Thames being in
“some way connected with the subject. After such an example
it is impossible to say of what importance any old stone or bit of
_ parchment may not be under some circumstances. Some years ago
avery large property was at stake (that of the Earl of Shrewsbury)
and the adjudication depended, I do not say wholly, but very ma-
_terially, upon evidence of a very ordinary kind, a half-effaced in-
scription upon an old monument in a village Church. Of what
| importance parish registers may be, the Berkeley Peerage case
is an example. Those who have the custody of such documents
_ eannot be too careful of them.
| I have so far spoken of Archzology as a science which has
3 made great progress in our country. Let me; for a few mo-
_ ments, ask your attention to what has been done with respect
|= to it in other countries. Denmark and Sweden are rich in
| eollections, a fact which shows the study was appreciated in modern
| _ Scandinavia. Switzerland has for some time interested the world
with her lake dwellings. At Rome English archeologists are pro-
minent in clearing out the old city. The result will be to correct a
great deal of imperfect description that has hitherto been given of
*
264 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
its antiquities. In Greece and Asia Minor Dr. Schlieman is the
hero of the day. He has raked out of its ashes a city which is
believed to be Troy. At Mycenz again his discoveries are most in-
teresting, and the more so because nothing, so to speak, is ever”
heard about the place in the prose history of Greece. It is really
only known by the mention of it in the Iliad as “a place abounding
in gold,” and now after so many centuries, a pickaxe archeologist,
suddenly fills up the omission of history, and confirms the more
ancient poet, by striking upon the very gold in which Mycene
abounded. Pass on eastward to Jerusalem, one of the most inter-
esting cities in the world. Of its ancient greatness very little is
left. The site of the great temple is known, and part of a terrace
wall which supported it still exists, but the date of it is uncertain.
There, however, is also a Society of English archzologists at work,
and besides that, another company is busy in surveying Palestine,
for the purposes of clearing up its geography. I will not go farther
Fast, than just to remind you of Nineveh and Babylon; and of the
valuable evidence to Scripture History, obtained from the very curious
inscriptions on stone and terra cotta, which were so wonderfully
interpreted by the late Mr.GeorgeSmith,of the British Museum. One
might, indeed, go all round the world, for we can hardly take up a
newspaper without seeing some paragraph that mentions ‘ An-
*
tiquities”’ discovered in countries not much, at least not familiarly
known to us; proving, that although we speak of them as new, they
really are old inhabited countries ; and that there is, indeed, a very
wide field still inviting the curiosity of archzologists of this class,
for a long time to come. To return homewards. Our Scottish
neighbours are continually producing highly-finished works of illus-
tration, which show that they take a deep interest in their rational
antiquities. The Welsh, as in duty bound, deal with the Ancient
Britons, and can fill many shelves in book-cases with the labours of
Cambrian Archeologists. In Ireland there is not only a great
deal left from ancient times that is most curious; but there is a
very increasing spirit among her scholars and literary men, to
develope and preserve their Antiquities. They have several Arche-
ological Societies; and a recent Report of the Commissioners of Public
OO ee
The President’s Address. 265
Works takes notice of the progress that is making in the restoration
of Cathedrals and Monuments, including the Crosses and those
peculiar Round Towers about which so much has been written.
This leads me to remark, what, indeed, must have often occurred
to those who look at Archzological Societies seriously —that not only
in Ireland, but in every other country, the first and the oldest ex-
pression of thought, through the medium of art, is found in works
connected with religion. In the mind of man, religious sympathies,
doctrines and traditions, take a natural precedence of everything else.
Be the country, or the period, what it may, heathen, Christian,
classical, or medieval, the oldest monuments—even the rudest—
seem to proclaim that a sense of over-ruling Power is natural to man.
Time, of course, will wear everything out; but religious feeling is
as old as man himself, and will last aslong. That feeling may have
its periods of languor, but it has also its periods of energy, and
nothing is more remarkable than the great, and, I may say, extra-
ordinary efforts that have been made during the last half-century to
restore to a proper condition the ecclesiastical buildings, great and
small, from the Cathedral to the village Church, of Great Britain
and Ireland. To say that this revival is solely owing to any one
class of men, would be most unjust ; but it would be equally unjust
if we did not say that a great deal of this energy of revival is owing
to the stimulus that has been given to the public by the industry
and activity of Archzological Societies.
I must not omit to observe that since your meeting here at
Warminster in 1856, besides the publication of several volumes
connected with the history of this county, two museums have
been established within it: one at Salisbury, chiefiy through the
munificence of Mr. Blackmore, the other at Devizes, under the
more immediate auspices of this Society. To the claims of these
museums for support, I would take advantage of this occasion to
eall the attention of the county. They have been established, and
I sincerely hope that there may-be found among those who come
after us, spirit enough to maintain them.
Before I conclude I would say a few words upon a subject in which
your proper President (Sir John Lubbock), whose place I am now
266 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
4
occupying, has taken especial interest—the preservation of Ancient
Monuments. There may be certain difficulties in fixing the’ precise
limits of the measure which he so warmly advocates, but in the
general objects of it he is sure to be supported by the great body of
archeologists. A valuable list has been made (under the joint
direction of the Society of Antiquaries and Board of Works) of all
Historical Monuments known to exist throughout every county.
This is an important help to let us know at all events what we have
got. Many of these are in a state of dilapidation simply from un-
certainty as to who ought to repair them, and in Wiltshire we have
to lament the damage, I might almost say the destruction of one of
the most curious monuments in the world, that at Avebury, near
Marlborough. These very ancient monuments of earthwork and
mighty stones, will, of course, be more interesting to some people
than to others, and it is quite possible that many care nothing about
them. But that is not exactly the question. They are, in a national
point of view, so many evidences that ours was an inhabited country
in remote ages. Something like the pedigree and title-deeds of a
private gentleman, they prove ancient descent and possession. The
old title deeds may, perhaps, not be very legible, nor may they be
wanted for any purpose of modern legal use: but their very age
obtains for them a certain care and respectful veneration. It is to
be hoped, at all events, that failing any legislative enactment for
the preservation of our National Monuments, public attention may
have been so far called to the subject, that some good may be done.
Though we may not be able to replace what has been destroyed, the
spirit of further destruction and of wanton injury may be checked.
Sir Joun Lupsock begged to propose a vote of thanks to the
noble Marquis, on behalf of the meeting, for his interesting and
suggestive Address. It was one which naturally appealed to all
of those present, because he supposed there was not one there who
did not feel a great interest in archeological science. Lord Bath
had brought forward a number of well-chosen illustrations, and he
trusted the result would be to increase their interest, and through
the press, that of many others, in the prosperity of their Society.
Lord Bath reminded them that he was president when they met at
Report. 267
Warminster twenty-one years ago, and he (Sir John) could assure
his lordship that that fact was by no means forgotten by his neigh-
bours, for since he had been in the neighbourhood he had been many
times reminded of it. Great satisfaction was also expressed at his
Lordship’s presence with them once more. He would not occupy
their time, but he thought he should be only echoing their wishes
if he not only suggested a vote of thanks to his Lordship for his
Address, but expressed a hope that when the Society once more met
in Warminster, they might again see Lord Bath filling the position
he had so well and so fittingly occupied.
The Rev. Preb. Sir J. E. Purxtres, who seconded the motion,
said, as regarded archzology itself, every educated mind must feel a
warm interest in it. Old Churches, old castles, old manor houses,
old deeds, and everything else connected with the past, were, as the
noble Marquis had pointed out, some of the chief handmaids of
history. Archeology, again, was one of the best correctives that
‘they could possibly have for conceit. People were sometimes apt
to talk a great deal about the progress of the nineteenth century ;
but when they looked upon the architecture, the stained glass, the
sculpture and the painting of the past, he thought they ought to
speak, not of modern progress, but of modern decline. He only
wished that there were more archeological features of interest in -
the town of Warminster, possessing, as it did, a history of eight
hundred years at least, for it was even mentioned in Domesday as
_ ©old Warminster.” He could assure them that the presence of the
Society in the town was hailed with pleasure and delight by the
- inhabitants.
_ The motion was put to the meeting by the Rev. A. C. Suita,
and carried by acclamation.
_ Tue Presrpent then called upon the Rev. A. C. Sarre (one of
the General Secretaries) , to read the
ee ee
REPORT.
“The Committee of the Wiltshire Archxological and Natural
History Society has again the satisfaction of congratulating the
Members on the onward progress and general prosperity of the
268 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
Society. So far from any diminution of interest in its proceedings
evincing itself as time goes on, it is year by year attracting to itself
more and more the goodwill and co-operation of the county.
“As regards the number of names now on the books, there is a
steady increase; in 1875 the figure stood at 340, in 1876 at 355,
and at the present moment at 380. This, however, is far below the
mark which the Committee confidently aspires to see the Society
reach ; indeed, completely to work out the object which the Society
has in view, (viz., elucidating the past history, as well as the natural
history of the county) it will be necessary to gain, not only the
countenance, but the active support of the more educated classes
throughout the length and breadth of Wiltshire generally. |
** Amongst the losses by death which the Society has experienced
during the last twelvemonth, it has especially to deplore two of its
original Members, each of whom has taken a lively part in our
proceedings, whose assistance we shall sorely miss, and who were
both present during our gathering last year at Salisbury. We allude
to Mr. Matcham and the Rev. Prebendary Wilkinson, Rector of
Broughton Gifford.
“ Mr. Matcham (it need scarcely be said here) was a noted arche-
ologist, long before the Society was formed. As one of the fellow-
workers with Sir Richard Hoare at Stourhead, he was reverenced as
the Nestor in our ranks, while his kindly genial nature endeared
him no less to our hearts; and his presence at our annual meetings
(and he seldom failed to attend) was always welcomed by us most
cordially. For a record of what -he has done for archeology we
must refer to the memoir we hope to publish in the forthcoming
number of the magazine.'!. Enough on this occasion if we mention
him with sincere regret at his loss, though few who saw his venerable
form when he drove over to the Moot at Downton to welecme us
last year, could expect at the very advanced age of eighty eight,
that he would be able to join in many more of our excursions.
“Far more untimely and unexpected was the death of the Rev.
John Wilkinson ; who, within ten days of the meeting at Salisbury
1 See in last No., pages 236—7.
Report. 269
last year, in which he took a prominent part, breathed his last in his
sixty-first year, to the regret of his many friends, and to the exceed-
ing loss of this Society, of which he had been an active supporter
from its foundation, and to whose Magazine he had, from time to
time, sent many valuable contributions. Of this very worthy mem-
ber of our Society we also hope to publish a memoir in the Magazine,
to which we would refer for farther details of his life and Archzolo-
gical work,?
“ The financial position of the Society deserves the attention of the
Members. The expenses have necessarily increased since the opening
of the Museum building, and at the present time the Society has no
reserve in hand. The Committee desires to call especial attention
to the fact that the Museum building account still remains open,
and shows a balance against the Society of £181 2s. The Com-
mittee has determined to close this account at the end of the present
year, and in the meantime wishes to urge on the members the desi-
rability of still further reducing this adverse balance, which will
have to be carried to the general account, in order that the action
of the Society in other directions may not be crippled. The Com-
mittee ventures to entertain the hope that this farther appeal to the
members and friends of the Society will be taken in good part, and
meet with a fitting response, as the efficiency of the Society depends
so much on its financial prosperity.
- © Of the Museum and Library the Committee has to report that
considerable progress has been made in the Natural History depart-
ment, by the deposit of a fine collection of British Birds, belonging
to Captain Ernlé Warriner, so that the Ornithology of the British
Isles is now fully represented. A great number of specimens has
been added to the Herbarium by the gift of the- Rev. W. Moyle
Rogers, of Trusham Rectory, Devon, who has enriched our collections
by no less than five hundred species, which he collected specially for
us, chiefly in the southern parts of the county; but above all our
best thanks are due in this department to our local secretary for
Marlborough, the Rev. T. A. Preston, by whom the Herbarium has
1See in last No., pages 234—6,
270 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
been chiefly collected, and altogether arranged, and to whose inde-
fatigable exertions it is due that the Flora of the County is thus
satisfactorily illustrated.
“The Committee regrets that it cannot speak quite so hopefully
of the Archzological and Geological Sections: not at all because
they are ill-represented, but on the contrary, because, owing to want
of space, it is impossible properly to arrange the specimens already
in possession, or to make room for others which may be presented
to the Society ; but it trusts that at no very distant date, additional
room may be given to these departments.
“Tn regard to the Magazine, two numbers have been published
since the last annual meeting, and a third is considerably advanced
towards completion, and will, it is hoped, shortly be in the hands of
Members. The Index also to the last eight volumes (Vols. ix. to
xvi., both inclusive) which was announced in our last Report is
completed and published, and for this very valuable addition, a work,
too, of no little labour and painstaking, your Committee desires to
express the obligations of the Society to the Local Secretary for
Calne, the Rev. W. C. Plenderleath, Rector of Cherhill.
“The Committee has within the last twelvemonth devoted much
attention to the rules of the Society, the formation of the Society’s
Museum and Library having necessitated the election of Curators,
a Librarian, and other officers, not provided for in the original rules.
This seemed to be a good opportunity for revising the rules through-
out, and fitting them for the more advanced position of the Society ;
this has been done, in great measure, through the agency of Mr.
Stevens; and such rules and bye-laws, recommended by the Com-
mittee, have been approved at a Special General Meeting of the
Society summoned for the purpose last May, and have since been
circulated amongst the Members.
“Tt only remains to thank all who in their several capacities have,
during the past year, advanced the causes of Archeology and Natural
History within our county. A vast field of enquiry yet lies before
us, and it is only by the assistance of many eyes and many hands
that even a scanty gleaning can be made. Your Committee desires,
in concluding this Report, gratefully to record its sense of the value
ae ee
Report. 271
of the communications which have, from time to time, been made
from all parts of the county, and earnestly to invite the continued
assistance and co-operation of all, not only from those already en-
rolled as its supporters, but also from others of all ranks and classes
hitherto unconnected with our Society.”
The Rev. A. C. Sarru desired to add a few words as a supplement
to the Report; in order to explain the financial position of the
Society. For many years past the Society had in hand a capital of
some £200 or £300, from which it could draw when necessary. But
when the Museum was established at Devizes, and there was a de-
ficiency in the funds for building and furnishing that Museum, it
was found necessary to lend their capital in order to clear the building
account. The Committee, however is extremely anxious to get back
this capital, which is so necessary to their well-being; and with
this view earnestly entreats donations from the Members of the
Society, so that the work of the Society may not be hampered for
want of the means which are absolutely necessary for carrying it on.
Lord Herytzssury, in moving the adoption of the Report, ex-
pressed a hope that the appeal which the Society was making to the
county would not be made in vain. He confessed that he himself was
not much of an archeologist, although he had been a Member of
the Society ever since its commencement. He highly approved of
its objects, and was sure that the county generally appreciated the
labours of those who made it their study and had investigated and
thrown so much light upon the manners and customs of our fore-
fathers. Wiltshire had every reason to be proud of her ancient
monuments, and they all owed a deep debt of gratitude to that
Society for having brought to the light of day many things repect-
ing them which would otherwise have remained unknown.
_. The Rev. Canon Jackson seconded the motion, which was unani-
_ mously adopted.
On the motion of Sir Jonn Lussock, seconded by Mr. Mepricort,
“the General Secretaries, the Local Secretaries (with the addition of
j Mr. Mackay, for Trowbridge and district), the Curators, the retiring
Members of the Committee, the Treasurer, and the Auditors, were
re-appointed.
VoL. XVII.—NO. LI. x
272 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
The Rev. Canon Jackson, F.S.A., then read a very interesting
paper on the “Vale of Warminster,” which need not be further
mentioned here, as it will be found in ex/enso in another part of this
Magazine. At its conclusion the noble President, in the name of all
present, tendered their best thanks to Canon Jackson for his most in-
structive lecture.
Mr. C. H. Tatsor (one of the General Secretaries) then gave
some information for the guidance of excursionists on the following
day ; and this terminated the proceedings.
THE DINNER
took place in the lower room of the Town Hall, which had been
tastefully decorated for the occasion, the President of the Meeting
(the Marquis of Bath) in the chair. A large number of ladies and
gentlemen attended; and the hall was well filled. In proposing
the health of the Queen, the noble President said it was the proud
boast of this country that we did not live under institutions that
had been established by a stroke of the pen of any politician or
philosopher. The institutions of the country had developed gradually
according to the wants of the people and the developments of the
races. To trace out those developments was one of the duties of
archeologists, and they often looked to archxological science and
inquiry to give them the reason for the existence of many things,
which without such inquiry might seem at first sight anomalous and
unnecessary. But there was one institution of the country which
‘needed no archeological inquiry to justify. He meant the existing
sovereign of the realm and their loyalty as subjects. The time at
- their disposal was so short that he would not trespass long upon their
patience in proposing a toast which required so few words to re-
commend it. He proposed the health of “‘ Her Majesty the Queen.”
The noble Cuarrman next proposed the health of His Royal
Highness the Prince of Wales and the other Members of the Royal
Family. After which his Lordship said that of all objects which
were of interest to archxologists there were none so numerous,
so varied in kind, and that occupied so much of the attention
of archzological societies, and of those who took the least interest
CE eT
The Dinner. 273
in art, as the religious edifices of this country. They could
trace the history of the country, in almost every county, in the
various descriptions of architecture which they found among’ its
churches. The clergy to whose hands those edifices had been
specially committed had not shown themselves unworthy of the task
devolving upon them. They took the utmost interest in those
Churches, and had done their best to place them in a proper con-
dition for public worship in accordance with the best archeological
science and knowledge of the day. After referring to the progress
of Church building and restoration during the last thirty years, his
Lordship said that as archeological and architectural knowledge in-
creased, a purer taste had sprung up, and they now looked with
horror upon what they admired thirty years ago. It was not only
for the care which they bestowed upon their Churches, but also for
their exertions for their proper maintenance and order that the
clergy of this diocese were entitled to their thanks. The clergy had
supported them in their meeting that day, and they always did their
best for the prosperity of the county, and the people living within
it. He begged to give them the health of the Bishop and Clergy
of the Diocese.
The Rev. Sir J. E. Pureps, in responding, referred to the warm
interest which the Bishop took in the Society, as evidenced by his
showing the Members over the Palace at Salisbury last year. There
was no doubt that the ministers of religion were one of the earliest
institutions in this country, and he hoped that while the clergy were
lovers of archeology they combined with it the love of progress.
sg He rejoiced that in that archeological gathering there were persons
_ of different shades of religious and political opinions—lovers of what
was old, lovers of progress, and reformers of abuses.
Lord Heyrsssury submitted the health of “The Chairman,” and
the Marquis of Baru briefly responded, expressing regret that Sir
John Lubbock had not presided over their gathering. He also said
_ that in the name of the people and town of Warminster he gave
them a hearty welcome, and he hoped that its warmth would com-
pensate them for the deficiency in objects of archeological interest
in that neighbourhood. He concluded by proposing: the health of
x 2
274 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
the President of the Society, Sir John Lubbock, and the How,
Baronet, in responding, said that no one could have more ably pre-
sided over their meetings than Lord Bath.
The Rev. Canon Jackson gave the health of the General Secre-
taries of the Society, to which the Rev. A. C. Smitu replied, and
proposed the health of the Local Committee and Secretaries. Mr.
C. Brxxck responded for the former, and the Rev. T. J. Hzarp and
Mr. F. Morean for the latter.
The toast of “ The Ladies,” proposed by the Chairman, and res-
ponded to by Mr. Arruur Baron, of Upton Scudamore, terminated
the proceedings at the dinner; and the company adjourned up-stairs
to the
FIRST CONVERSAZIONE,
which began at half-past seven, the Noble President of the Meeting
in the chair. Papers were read, by W. W. Ravenuttt, Esq., on
“Justice in Warminster in the olden time;” by the Rev. H. T.
Kinepon, on “ An Early Service in the Vernacular; ” and by the
Rev. A. C. Suir, on “Some Account of the Tavern Signs of
Wiltshire, and their Origin.” These papers will be printed in the
Magazine.
On the motion of Sir Joun Lussock a cordial vote of thanks was
accorded to the authors of the several papers; after which the com-
pany descended to the lower room, where refreshments were provided
on a liberal scale by the most hospitable Local Committee.
EXCURSION ON THURSDAY, AUGUST 238rp.
Under the guidance of the Secretaries a large party of excursion-
ists, to the number of about one hundred and fifty, left Warminster
soon after 9, a.m.,-on the brightest day of the summer, to follow out
the route laid down in the programme, as “ through the Deverells
and Mere to Stourhead.”
On ascending the hill towards Christchurch, a bird’s eye view of
Warminster was obtained, the old town lying nestled in the vale
below the hill, while beyond rose the noble range of downs crowned
by Battlesbury and Scratchbury Camps. Then by Crockerton
Woods to Longbridge Deverell, where the Vicar (the Rev. J. D.
Excursion on Thursday, August 23rd. 275
Morrice) pointed out the chief objects of interest in the Church, and
Mr. C. H. Tatsor added farther particulars.!. Then by the alms-
houses for old men and old women, built and endowed by Sir James
Thynne, and still maintained by a charge on the Longleat estates ;
by Hill Deverell ; and by a remarkable earthwork lying on the side
of the hill to the left of the road, to which attention had been
specially directed by the Rev. Canon Morrice, andewhich ran no
risk of being overlooked, through the happy and thoughtful device
of planting two small school-banners on the spot. At Brixton
Deverell the Church was visited under the guidance of the Rector
(the Rev. T. W. Dowprne). At Monkton Deverell a temporary
halt was made at a cottage, over the dvor of which, built into the
wall, were the arms of the Ludlow family carved in stone, supposed
to have been brought from the old manor house of the Ludlows at
Hill Deverell; the Church was also visited, but did not detain the
visitors long. Kingston Deverell, however, offered more attractions,
and the Rector (the Rev. D: M. Cizrx) courteously welcomed the
archeologists and conducted them over his Church, where he and
‘Mr. Taxzor pointed out the chief objects of interest, amongst which
a remarkable effigy of the thirteenth century attracted considerable
attention. In the rectory garden certain large stones were examined;
they are called “Egbert’s Stones,” or “King’s Stones,” and are
spoken of by the Saxon Chroniclers: they were brought by a
farmer from King’s Court Hill, where King Egbert is traditionally
said to have held his court, and for some time did duty as stepping-
stones to a barn: subsequently they were condemned to be broken
up as material for mending roads, but their substance was so hard
as to defy the efforts of their would-be destroyers, and now they
have found a refuge, and bid fair to be preserved.
— On leaving Kingston Deverell the-excursionists now began a long
and steep ascent of the downs, which here rise to a great elevation,
and when the summit is once gained, offer a most extensive panoramie
view. It was indeed a noble prospect which repaid the archeologists
~ As some account of the Churches visited during the excursions of the Society
will be given in a subsequent paper by Mr, Talbot, it is needless here to enter
_ into any details regarding them.
276 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
for their climb, as they looked baek over the vale of the Deverells,
forward over a vast expanse of the county of Dorset, stretched like
a map below; to the right over the swelling downs, here and there
capped by plantations : and to the left to the ridge crowned by the
town of Shaftesbury, A halt midway across the downs, and a
saunter across the grass, to visit an old Roman camp, was a pleasant
diversion ; and then the cavalcade of breaks and carriages descended
by the steepest of hills to Mere, making a short detour, however,
on the way, to visit an old farm-house, called the ‘“ Woodlands,”
which was once an old manor-house. Here the archeologists were
kindly permitted to wander at will; and upstairs, downstairs—now
into the cellar below, to see an old archway, now to the cheese-room
at the top, which was formerly the chapel—they followed one another
till the house overflowed. At length the Secretary’s whistle re-
called them to the carriages, when they retraced their steps to Mere ;
and here, under the guidance of the Vicar, the Rev. C. H. Townsend,
the fine old Church was inspected, and Mr. Talbot invited attention
to many details of architectural and antiquarian interest.1 Hasty
visits were then paid to the old Chantry House, by permission of
Dr. Watson; and to a fine old barn on the north of the Church,
with Perpendicular roof, mullioned window, and Gothic fire-places,
on one of which certain sacred emblems and monograms proclaimed
it to be an ecclesiastical building.
From Mere the archzologists drove to Zeals House, the delight-
ful residence of Miss Chafyn Grove, who cordially welcomed her
numerous visitors, and right hospitably entertained them with a
substantial luncheon, of which they partook in relays, while the
remainder wandered over the house and grounds, visiting the room
in which Charles II. slept for one night, when in concealment, and
gazing on the relics and heirlooms in the family of Grove, descended
from the famous cavalier of that name, who honourably lost his life
for his loyalty. After a hearty vote of thanks to Miss Chafyn Grove,
for her very liberal hospitality, which was proposed in suitable terms
? See notes of Churches visited during the excursions of the Society, by Mr.
Talbot.
Excursion on Thursday, August 23rd. 277
by Sir John Lubbock, and endorsed by the acclamations of the
visitors; and after Canon Jackson, acting as Miss Grove’s mouth-
piece, had responded in that lady’s name and assured the archzologists
of her pleasure in entertaining them; they drove on to Stourton,
where first the Church, then the beautiful pleasure-grounds of
Stourhead, and lastly the mansion house of Sir Henry Hoare, Bart.,
were in turn visited. Of the pleasure-grounds it may be said that
few spots in Wiltshire, if any, are more charming”: the lake so ad-
mirably formed; the trees and shrubs so luxuriant and withal so
flourishing in this congenial soil that popular tradition affirms that
a walking-stick, if left for a short time sticking in the ground, will
sprout! Without, however, insisting on the literal truth of the ~
tradition, it may be affirmed. that the soil is exceptionally suited to
the growth of the araucarias, deodaras, and other kindred trees,
which thrive here, as they do in few other places; while the laurel
hedges of Stourhead are notorious. But the house and its collections
were the chief attractions to archeologists ; first the library, where
the famous band of topographers used to assemble, under the
presidency of the father of Wiltshire antiquarians, the highly revered
Sir Richard Colt Hoare; where the magnificent volumes of Ancient
and Modern Wiltshire were prepared for the press by the inde-
_ fatigable baronet and his no less enthusiastic coadjutors, chief among
whom stands the honoured name of William Cunnington; and
where literary treasures, rare curiosities, gems of art, and valuable
paintings, still record the taste of our great Wiltshire Archzologist.
Above all, the museum of antiquities claimed of right, and obtained,
the eager attention of the visitors ; for what archzologist could look
without interest on the noble collection of urns, and the innumerable
objects of stone, bone, horn, gold and other metals, which once lay
beneath the barrows which are scattered over the length and breadth
. of North and South Wilts? No Wiltshire archeologists at all
_ events could pass them by unnoticed, and it was long before the
excursionists could be persuaded to tear themselves from this fasci-
nating spot, and resume their journey, through Maiden Bradley,
where they halted to inspect the Church, and by Crockerton to
Warminster,
278 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
SECOND CONVERSAZIONE.
This was held at the Town Hall, at 7.30, p.m., Sir John Lubbock
in the chair. Two papers were read, both of which will be printed
in the Magazine. The first by the Rev. John Baron, on “The
study of Anglo-Saxon, and its value to the archeologist,” upon
which the Rev. J. J. Danren made some remarks ; and the President
offered the thanks of the meeting to Mr. Baron. Then a paper by
Sir Joun Luszock, Bart., on “Some Observations on the Habits of
Ants ;” which produced enquiries from Mr. Brivz and Mr. Baron.
When Sir Jonn Luzzock had replied to these questions, the Rev.
A. C. Srru, in the name of the Society, thanked Sir John for his
most valuable paper. For himself he had listened to it with the
greatest possible interest, and personally he felt he owed a deep debt
of gratitude to its author. It was one of the most difficult parts of his
duty,in preparing for these annual meetings,to secure at least one good
natural history paper: he had tried his utmost to obtain a paper on
the Great Bustard from his friend, Professor Newton, who knew
more of that bird’s history than anybody. He had subsequently
endeavoured, but ineffectually, to induce his friend, Mr. Frank
Buckland, to read a paper on the Fish of the neighbourhood. But
in securing a natural history paper from Sir John Lubbock, he felt
that his utmost wishes would be realised; and he was not disap-
pointed. He begged in the name of the Society as well as of the
meeting, to thank him for the treat he had given them.
Mr. C. H. Tarzor then called attention to the remains of a Church
which had been discovered by Mr. F. Stratton at St. Joan 0’ Gore ;
and the Rev. A. C..Smira exhibited three Colorado Beetles, in a
bottle of spirit, which had been sent from America, and consigned
to his eare for exhibition by Miss Ewart, of Broadleas, Devizes.
And then the company adjourned to the’ lower room, where they were
most hospitably entertained at supper by the local subscribers. At
its close Mr, Buenck proposed the health of the President, and ex-
pressed warm words of welcome to the Archeological Society. Sir
Joun Lussock, in returning thanks, spoke of the special attractions
of that neighbourhood, which he hoped to revisit, and proposed the
be,
Second Conversazione. 279
Local Committee, and the Local Secretary, Mr. F. Morgan, ex-
pressing at the same time the appreciation by the Society of the
extreme liberality of the inhabitants of Warminster. Mr. F.
Monreay, in reply, trusted that the Wiltshire Archeological Society
would repeat their visit to Warminster before another twenty years
had expired. Mr. Swayne proposed the health of the Conveyance
Committee, to which Mr. F. Bary responded, and finally gave the |
health of “The Ladies,” in whose behalf Sir George Arney returned
thanks.
EXCURSION ON FRIDAY, AUGUST 24rn.
The route marked out for this day was known as the “ Longleat
and Heytesbury Excursion;” and as the weather proved equally
propitious, and the objects to be visited were no less attractive,
this second expedition was considered to promise as much interest
and enjoyment as that of the first day, and in consequence a con-
siderable party of archzologists assembled to take part in it.
Leaving Warminster soon after 9, a.m., the excursionists, skirting
Cley Hill, passed by Prospect Hill (“ Heaven’s Gate”), to Longleat
House, where they were heartily welcomed by the Marquis of Bath,
the Society’s President of this Meeting. Here, conducted by the
noble owner, and by Canon J ackson, the company wandered over
the magnificent house, which has been designated the “ best built
mansion in the West; ” examining the large collection of pictures,
mostly portraits of the family; and then proceeded to the top of
the mansion, where Lord Bath pointed out some peculiarities in the
architecture, and from which a very fine panoramic view was en-
joyed. Then, while some wandered in the exquisite gardens, to
others was shown the very valuable library of “holy Bishop Ken,”
the saintly bishop of Bath and Wells, who, driven from his see
after being committed to the Tower for refusing to read James the
Second’s declaration in favour of Romanism, had found an asylum
at Longleat, and here he walked, and read, and hymned and prayed,
and slept, to do the same again. Here too Canon Jackson most
kindly exhibited the principal literary treasures: magnificent old
MSS., and many precious tomes of exceeding interest. Indeed, so
280 The Twenty-Fourth Annual Meeting.
long did those who were privileged to see these priceless gems of
ancient. penmanship linger over the attractive specimens stored in
Bishop Ken’s apartment, that when they descended the stairs they
found the bulk of the party departed. So, with hearty thanks to
the Marquis of Bath (which Sir John Lubbock had also previously
tendered in the name of the Society), and to Canon Jackson, for
the exceeding treat he had given them, they made the best of
their way by Horningsham Church, to Sheerwater, where a spacious
marquee was erected, and a picnic luncheon was arranged, and to
this the whole party of archzologists speedily betook themselves.
Luncheon ended, Sir Jonn Lussock rose and said, as this was
the last time the archzologists would be assembled during the
present meeting, they could not separate without a hearty vote of
thanks to the General Secretaries of the Society (Rev. A. C. Smith,
Mr. Talbot, and Mr. Stevens), who conducted the affairs of the
Society, not only at the annual gatherings, but throughout the year,
from one end to another; who edited the Magazine, and in short
laboured diligently for the benefit of the Society. This was seconded
by the Rev. W. Hicxmay. The Rev. A. C. Smith, in returning
thanks, deplored the absence of their colleague, Mr. Stevens, who
would have been of the greatest service to them could he have been
present, but who was unfortunately detained at Salisbury by serious
illness. Mr. Smith could not but congratulate them on the success
of the Warminster meeting, and proposed the health of Sir John
Lubbock, without whom their meeting would not have been so
efficiently conducted. Mr. Tatsor also returned thanks, and seconded
the proposition of Mr. Smith: he also spoke in feeling terms of
the serious drawback to the meeting which Mr. Stevens’ illness
had occasioned. The toast was heartily responded to by the company,
and Sir Jonn Luspock expressed his acknowledgments.
But a short time was allowed for strolling on the banks of Sheer-
water, and then en route was the order given. Proceeding by
Longbridge Deverell, the archzologists drove to Sutton Veny, and
first, by invitation of the owner, visited Greenhill, where they were
heartily weleomed by Colonel Everett, and other members of his
family, and where they found much to interest them. Thence to
Excursion of Friday, August 24th. 281
the new and very handsome Church, where they were received by
the Rector (Rev. G. Powell), and then to the Rectory House, where
they were shown the remains of a hall of the fourteenth century,
_ with doors to kitchen and buttery, and where some excellent
specimens of rare British birds were exhibited. Then to the ruins
of the old Church, and then to the town of Heytesbury, halting: first
at Parsonage Farm House, to see a room of the date of James I.,
with ornamental plaster ceiling, and fireplace bearing a coat of arms:
then to the very interesting Church of Heytesbury, not long since
restored, and of which Mr. Talbot proved a most able exponent.}
Last, but by no means least, the excursionists, by invitation of
Lord Heytesbury, drove through the park to Heytesbury House:
_ where they were not only freely allowed to examine the fine collection
of pictures, and many curiosities, amongst which a huge “ Bustard
gun,” supported by a rest (and not unlike the duck gun used by
fowlers in boats), was amongst the most attractive ; but were also
very hospitably entertained with such refreshments as they would
most appreciate, after their recent picnic at Sheerwater, coffee and
tea, wine and fruit, in abundance. Taking leave of Lord Heytesbury
and his amiable family with many thanks for their hospitality and
kindness, the archeologists now drove straight back to Warminster,
- foregoing the attractions of a climb to Battlesbury, and thus brought
to a close one of the most enjoyable meetings the Society has ever
_ experienced.
nee EEE
1 See his account of some of the Churches visited in this excursion,
282
Che Gale of Carminster,
By the Rey. Canon Jacxson, F.S.A.
(Read before the Society at Warminster, 22nd August, 1877.)
k AM not going to describe every object presented to observa-
$$) tion in the long Vale of Warminster: but leaving you to
use your own eyes in the course of the excursions I propose now
to treat the subject very generally; as to
1. Tae Water.
Tue Lanp.
THe Lanevace.
Tue Popruration.
I. Tue Water.
The key to a good deal that we see, but do not quite understand
on the surface of a country, is found in a little knowledge of its
geological arrangement.
If you wish to know, by a very homely illustration, how this valley
was formed, and what it consists of, here is one :— Take a large sheet
of paste, colour: it blue, and lay it on the table: roll out a second,
colour it green, and lay it on the blue: roll out a third, leaving it
_white, and lay that at the top. Your lowest layer represents blue clay ;
the middle one, green sand; the top one, chalk. Then take a scoop,
dig out from the surface a long hollow, ending on the level of the
table. Your scoop cuts through the chalk, the green sand, and the
blue clay. Provide a running stream through it, and you have the
valley of the Wyly. All the way along, on both sides of the vale,
is chalk at top, green sand on the slopes, and clay below. These
three are, of course, each made up of subordinate layers; different
kinds of chalk, of sands, and clays—but, as I have described it, you
have the general outline of the geology of the district.
The river Wyly is supplied by more than one spring. The Were,
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.S.A. 283
from which some have thought that this town takes its name, does
not help very much; for it is so small as not always to be seen. The
Deverel helps a little more. This rivulet gives its name to five
contiguous parishes—Brixton Deverel, Monkton Deverel, Longbridge
Deverel, Hill Deverel, and, farthest off, Kingston Deverel.
It is a common belief that the little river itself is ca//ed Deverel
from the two words “dive” and “rill,” because the rill dives
underground, and, after a certain subterranean passage, re-appears.
Before settling whether the river is so called, from diving, it is better
to be quite sure that it does dive.
Such rivers there certainly are. Without going back to the
classical Arethusa, said to sink into the earth in Greece and emerge
in Sicily (which may or may not be true), I happen to be very well
acquainted with one in Staffordshire, which disappears in the ground
near the Duke of Devonshire’s copper mine at Ecton, and after a
course of four or five miles comes bubbling up, a very considerable
stream, in a grotto in a gentleman’s garden. Having once lived at
that place for two or three years, I can vouch for the fact. But
such things are not very common ; so one is curious to know whether
there 7s any such natural phenomenon near here.
It is mentioned in several old books. First, in “ Drayton’s
_ Polyolbion,” a very long geographical poem, published in 1613.
In this poem all the hills, woods and rivers in England are personified,
and made to converse with one another about their history. The
work has maps, on a rough scale, in which these personified rivers
are represented ; and in that of Wiltshire, the goddess “ Dyver”
drawn as half-buried in the ground, her feet coming out at one hole
and her head at another.
__ It is also mentioned in Camden’s Britannia and in John Aubrey’s
_ Natural History of Wilts. Finding it in those authorities, Bishop
_ Tanner, a very eminent divine, author of the great work called
_“Notitia Monastica,” [a native of this county, born at Lavington
in 1674, and anxious to preserve its history,] was curious to know
the truth of the story. He says, “ I am informed by the minister
of. Longbridge Deverill, and another gentleman that lived at Maiden
Bradley thirty years that they never knew or heard of this river
284 The Vale of Warminster.
Deverill that runs under ground.” The gentlemen of Longbridge
Deverel and Maiden Bradley were clearly not of very inquiring
minds in those days.
It is difficult sometimes to get at the precise fact in a matter
which, nevertheless, everybody talks of as a fact. I have often
asked of gentlemen who have liberty to whip the water of the
Deverel for trout, whether they ever observed the trout suddenly
disappear into the earth, because in that case they might have noticed
that the water vanished also, but they had never met with such in-
terruption to sport. Nothing of the kind certainly occurs in those
four out of the five Deverel parishes that lie nearest to Warminster.
Upon further inquiry it turned out that, if anywhere, this diving
rill must be looked for before it reaches Kingston Deverel. So I
went one day to Kingston Deverel, and enquired on the very spot,
whether the rivulet dived. Of two gentlemen whom I met, be-
longing to the parish, and who had lived in it a good many years,
one said he thought it did, and the other doubted it. I was shown
the place just above Kingston Deverel where a little stream certainly
~ comes out of the ground, and was told that the place where it is
supposed to go in was two or three miles off; so next day I went
there. On the road from Maiden Bradley to Stourhead, about one
mile or so out of Maiden Bradley, at a hamlet called Norton Ferrers,
a lane on your right hand comes down from Kilmington, and in it
is a little stream, which crosses the turnpike road through a culvert
and fills a pond in a field close to the road.! There is no visible
outlet of water from that pond, and as the stream is always running
in, it must run out somehow, and certainly under ground. A man
who showed me the place told me there was no doubt it went under
ground and came out at Kingston Deverel, and seemed surprised
when I asked him how he could be quite sure, because it might run
anywhere else. “Oh,” said he, “they did put in a duck—same as
at Bonham” [a place near Stourhead, where I suppose there is
1 It is called ‘* Blackwell Spring,” and lies just within the county of Somerset. :
It is one of three sources of water, very near together, which run in wholly
different directions. This, to Salisbury. A second, the Avon, to Bath and
Bristol. The third, the Stour, into Dorsetshire.
a By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.S.A. 285
something of the same kind], “and the duck came out just above
Kingston Deverel.” In such cases the unfortunate duck is generally
said to come out without any feathers on its back, and that would
eertainly be the case with it, after traversing two or three miles in
an almost imperceptible passage between the strata of the chalk
from Norton Ferrers to Kingston Deverel.!
(A map was exhibited showing the particular place and geological
structure of the neighbourhood )
Of course, if the duck experiment ever was tried, there can be no
doubt that it is one and the same rivulet that goes in and comes
out. The general slope of the land at that place is such that if the
water ran out of the pond on the surface, it could not possibly run
in any other direction than towards Kingston Deverell, so I have
no doubt that it runs that way under the surface. But whether it
really takes its name from that circumstance is rather doubtful.
Against it is the fact that in Dorsetshire, just above Milborne
St Andrew, there is another rivulet Deveril, which does not go
underground. As to the word rill (from the Latin rivuwlus), I do
not know whether it is found in use so far back as we find the name
Devrel; for this name occurs nine times in Domesday Book, as a
_ general name for the land on the banks of this rivulet, without any
mention of Longbridge, Hill, or Kingston, all of which seem to
have been distinctive names added later. Some of our learned
etymologists think that Devrel is a Welsh word, “ dwr,” “ dur,”
_ “dever” (water), the diminutive “el” being added, the whole
meaning “little river.” To this derivation I rather incline: and
am accordingly of opinion that the name should be spelled Devere?.
It is certainly a curious coincidence that it should be a rill that dives.
; The Deverel stream however is not the only source of the Wyly.
There is another equally, if not more, copious spring that feeds the
lake called Shearwater. Of this name there are two explanations.
One is, “clear,” or “ bright,” from the Anglo-Saxon word “ seir,”
and certainly nothing better deserves the name than the water in
1Jn the case of the ‘‘ Arethusa,” it is said that a golden cup, put in by an
SOivmpian victor at Elis, came out in Sicily. (Note to Erasmus’ Colloquies, p.727.)
286 The Vale of Warminster.
the little pond where the spring rises about a quarter of a mile from
the lake. The other explanation is, that it is called “ Shire-water ”
from giving its name to this county. This seems to have been
suggested by Drayton, the poet above-mentioned. Many people,
speaking of a county, pronounce the word as “ shere:” they say
Derby-shere, or York-shere. The lake of Shear-water was not made
till the year 1791; and before that time the name of Shire-water
was given to the stream that now feeds the lake. Ina map of 1727,
in Cox’s Magna Britannia, the little pond where the spring comes
out is called “ Shire-water Head.” This Shire-water stream and
the Deverel proper meet at Longbridge, and together form the chief
source of the Wyly, which, growing larger, farther on, gives the
name to Wyly-town, a/ias Wilton, which was once the capital of
Wiltshire. Drayton, in the poem already mentioned, makes the
Wyly assert her rights in these lines :—
“And therefore claims of right the Plaine should hold her deare,
Which gives that town the name, which likewise names the Shere.”
You can adopt which of the two derivations you please: “ set,”
the adjective, clear; or “‘scir,”’ the substantive, county: both being
of the same period, commonly known as Anglo-Saxon. By what
name the water was called before that time I do not know.
Two more remarks are to be made about the Water in this vale.
I do not know of any mineral spring in it, whereas on the other side
of its northern boundary, [viz., the high ground or ridge called
properly North Ridge, but corruptly Norridge, extending from Cley
Hill to the downs, beyond which all the water runs away north,]
there are several. The geological explanation of this is, that a line
of earth, charged with iron, runs all the way along, outside of the
chalk hills, and impregnates the water of the springs there. Here,
in your vale, there is none of that peculiar iron earth.
Lastly—Please to observe on the map, that all the drainage of
your valley comes to a very narrow passage down at Wishford.
From hill to hill there is not a quarter of a mile. Keep on good
terms with the people of those parishes. Otherwise they may throw —
a dam across, only a few feet high, turn the whole into a lake, and
Ries. s_- ~
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.S.A. 287
drown every living thing in the upper part of the vale, A regiment
of Sappers and Miners would do it in twenty-four hours.
Having so far referred to what is curious in the water of your
vale I now come to
TI. Tue Lanp.
It struck me at the time of the “ Wiltshire Mancuvres” a few
years ago, as an interesting circumstance, that the river Wyly should
be fixed upon as the line to be contested by the opposing forces ;
the invader endeavouring to cross it, the defender doing his best to
prevent him; because, in taking a general survey of the valley of
the Wyly, it seems likely that some contest of a similar kind, only
a real one, may have taken place agesago. I happened to be present
at the closing struggle—the ‘ Battle of Codford,” and was amused
when it was all over, at seeing H.R H. The Commander-in-Chief
muster all the officers of his staff about him to receive his observa-
tions, within one of our old earthen rings, on the top of the hill. It
was a very suitable place, and I could not help thinking at the time
there is history repeating itself. What could all those great en-
campments on the left bank of the Wyly—Battlesbury, Scratchbury,
Yarnbury, and the rest of them—be there for, except to defend the
passage of the Wyly, and prevent some real invader? It may have
been so, or it may not; but here are the mighty camps still left,
and these certainly were not made for nothing. There were camps
also on the right bank, as at Langford and Grovely. The river
Wyly may have been a boundary line of conquest.
Some think that these hills, girt with earthen banks, were never
: permanent camps, but only temporary places of refuge for the people
and their cattle to fly to for safety against roving and hostile tribes.
_ Bat whatever they were, one thing about them must strike every-
body: viz., where did the ‘people get water from? for such a thing
_ as a well is now very rarely to be seen within them, and whenever
found, must be of very great depth. Take for instance Cley Hill,
close to you. It is what geologists call an “ outlier,” that is, a hill
_ standing outside of, and apparently (though not in reality) cut off
from the great field of chalk to which it belongs. Its name “ Cley ”
VOL, XVII.—NO. LI. * x
288 The Vale of Warminster.
has nothing to do with the earth called clay, because the hill is
entirely of chalk. The name is a mere corruption of an old word
Clee, which means hill. Clee hills, in Shropshire, Clack Abbey, in
Wiltshire, and some others are probably only corrupt forms of the
same word.
On Cley Hill (so, in obedience to custom, we continue to call it,
although if Cleg means hill, the phrase becomes tautologous) and
running round it, is a dry foss or ditch with a high earthen bank,
but not a drop of water or sign of a well.
Without referring particularly to King Alfred and his army, who
are thought by some (not by myself) to have gone up there, but
generaliy to hills of this kind that appear to have been occupied as
encampments: one may ask “How could any great number of
persons remain there for any length of time, so as to stand a siege 5
there being no water?” This question was answered once quite to
my own satisfaction. Last year I happened to be going to Longleat
with another visitor, one who had been tossed about the world and
had seen a good deal; and as we drove along I started the subject.
My companion said he had seen the thing over and over again in
New Zealand, and could tell exactly how it was. He then described
to me that in the case of the New Zealand ‘‘Cley Hills” (‘‘ Pahs,” or
Hippahs, as they call them there), on the earthen bank that runs
all round, are very strong palisades of wicker work, and posts of a
considerable height. These, standing on a high bank above a ditch,
form a most difficult barrier to get over, and an excellent protection
against lances. Against artillery, of course, barrier there would be
none, but our hill fortresses existed long before artillery. But the
water—how about that? I saw, he said, two or three hundred
women carrying up pails and pitchers on their heads all day long
from the streams at the foot of the hill. As that supply would of
course be sufficient until some enemy interfered and stopped the
graceful water-carriers, what, I asked, is the use of storming these
New Zealand pahs, and sacrificing lives, because you have only to
cut off the supply of water and the camp must surrender? He said
that was exactly the case. It was a waste of life to attack them ;
but surround the place, and in a few days it must be given up, 7.¢.,
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.8.A. 289
as soon as they had used all the water they had got. With this
explanation one can make sense of an encampment on Cley Hill,
which without it is not very intelligible. Material for posts, palisades,
and wicker work might have been had to any amount in Selwood
Forest, which ran for twenty miles along the foot of the hill, and
water also in abundance at the springs in Corsley, especially at
Sturford, also close at the foot.
That, then, is one of the uses to which we are sure, from the
military earth-works left, our Cley Hills, Scratchburies, and Yarn-
buries, must have been put.
There were other uses, such as we read of in the Bible about the
“ Hieh Places” in the East. In the Prophetic buoks, particularly,
_ the Israelites are continually being rebuked for their leaning towards
the worship they found in the country they had come to—the
abominations, as the Prophets call them, 2x high places. Among the
popular customs of our own country, there are many vestiges of
~ heathen worship upon ‘high hills: probably the worship of the sun
or various heathen deities. But when this country was Christianized,
the name of the heathen deity was by degrees supplanted by that of
a Christian Saint; and the hill continued to be frequented for some
festival belonging to the new national religion.
_ There are several hills in the county of Wilts where the people
on certain holidays used—and do still use—to go up and hold some
kind of revel. At Martins-hill, near Marlborough, the youth
of that neighbourhood were accustomed to go up on Palm Sunday
and slide down the precipitous escarpment on horses’ skulls, as a
kind of sledge. Cley Hill also had its revel. This was on Palm
Sunday, and was probably a relic of the procession which on that
day used to be made before the Reformation. I have seen it men-
tioned that this gathering took place in order to keep up the bound-
aries of two parishes that cross the hill; but the day fer that custom
was usually Holy Thursday. Whatever it was, the custom led to
riot and abuse, and was discontinued. It still continues at the
celebrated mound of Silbury, near Marlborough, and at other places
in Wilts. (Wilts Arch. Mag., vii., 180.)
In the adjoining county of Somerset (as I observed lately in a
y¥2
290 The Vale of Warminster.
newspaper) Brent Knoll, a well-known hill, “has from time imme-
morial exhibited, on the first Sunday in May, a spectacle sufficient to
make Sabbatarians shudder. Formerly it was the habit to indulge
in all manner of games, whilst shows, nut-stalls, &c., were not
wanting, and folks from all the country round assembled in thousands
to join in the revelry. To stop these unseemly gatherings many
attempts have been made without effect, time having legalised the
custom, the origin of which is unknown; but we are glad to note
the fact that the affair seems falling into decay.”
I have read! that in the last century the youth of this neighbour-
hood used to assemble on some particular day at the top of Bidecombe
Hill, for the special purpose of eating “furmity,” an agreeable
composition of boiled wheat in the grain, and sugar: a dainty,
which, in more northern counties, in my early days, was specially
reserved for Christmas Eve. A great hole at the top of Bideombe
Hill used to be called “ Furmity Hole.” Whether the “ Furmity”
custom, or the name, survives I know not, but the gathering to-
gether of people did continue some few years ago on Palm Sunday,
in some way connected with the maintaining of bounds, as in the
ease of Cley Hill.
The name of Bidcombe Hill brings up other recollections. You
have heard, no doubt, of the famous hill of old Grecian poetry,
Parnassus, the favourite abode of Apollo and the Muses. To have
been so fortunate as to climb towards the top of it meant to be a
respectable poet, a favourite with Apollo and the Muses. You may
perhaps not know that the Parnassus of Wiltshire is “ Bidcombe
Hill’ A poem with that title was written many years ago by a
worthy curate of Horningsham, whom I knew very well, the late
Mr. Skurray. He was an admirer of what he used to call hill
poetry, of the class well known as Cooper’s Hill, by Denham. To
those who have any knack of writing verses, and who wish for a
subject, allow me to recommend a high hill, where you can see
pretty well to a distance all round. Take a field-glass, and you will
soon find plenty of topics to write about. You will see monastic —
1 Notes and Queries, Fifth Series, y. 273.
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.8.A. 291
ruins, noblemen’s mansions, distant columns, a Cathedral spire, and
so forth. Having touched a little upon each of these points, and
their history, you can then fall back upon the shepherd and his flock,
the skylark or nightingale, or perhaps the hounds running, or the
railway train. A real poet, according to Shakspeare, is like the
lunatic and the lover, “of imagination all compact.” But it is
possible to write pretty verses, as Mr. Skurray did, in this descriptive
style, where no great amount of, imagination is required, because
the scene before you presents abundance of realities.
TrrRacEs.—I come now to speak of the terraces or steps that
_ abound on the sides and slopes of the downs, not only in Wiltshire,
but Dorsetshire, and other counties, where chalk hills occur. They
are sometimes called lynchets, or lynches, from, I believe, the Anglo-
Saxon “ land scéard,” i.e., land division. There is a good example
at the foot of the down opposite to Heytesbury, called the Giant’s
Steps; and another on the north side of Battlesbury, where they
look, says Sir Richard C. Hoare, like a succession of broken ramparts.
So much has been written controversially about these lynchets
that it would take a very long time even to give an epitome of the
different opinions that have been held, and of the arguments by
which those opinions have been backed. I can only therefore very
briefly allude to them. The real point is, are they artificial, made
by man, or are they natural ? Of those who hold to: the artificial
explanation, some think that they were made by the treading of
cattle: that, as sheep make walks: along the hill-sides, so, heavier
animals, by the beautiful regularity and gentleness of their foot-
steps, have produced a series of paths: as level as a billiard table.
This opinion may be dismissed as quite untenable.
The next is that they were made for the purpose of vineyards.
That the vine was cultivated in this country during the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries for the purpose of making wine there
‘is now no dowbt. There was acontroversy many years ago upon
‘the subject, in which one party maintained that the wine, or
vinum, so often mentioned, was. not the juice of the grape, but of
the apple, and that it was cider which was meant by the word wine.
But the question has been set at rest by the discovery of records and.
292 The Vale of Warminster.
accounts, especially those of the keeper of the vineyard at Windsor
Castle in the reign of Edward TII., in which every process of
planting and grafting to that of barrelling the liquor is mentioned.
What the quality of the liquor was I cannot say, but if it was not
good wine, we may hope that it made good vinegar.
Before we can pronounce a// our terraces to have been vineyards,
there are a few things to be considered. There would surely have
been more uniformity in the site and aspect. The terraces are at
different elevations, some close under the edge of the downs, some
in the middle, some quite at the foot, some on nearly level plaees.
They face different ways, some north, some south, east, or west.
Again, a soil mixed with chalk is not unfavourable for the vine, but
would it grow where there is nothing else but pure chalk? Very
few trees will. The woods and plantations which you see in different
parts of Wiltshire on the tops ef high ground, such as at Grovely
and Savernake, do not grow out of the chalk, but out of another
stratum, gravelly and sandy, which overlies the chalk. Add to this,
it is more likely that a vineyard, which requires very great attention,
would, like a garden or orchard, be placed as near as could be to the
owner’s house, and not stand here or there, or anywhere, away all
about the hills. So many of these terraces are there, that, if vines
grew upon all of them, Wiltshire must have been at one time a very
Burgundy, or Champagne country, as to abundance. I have always
believed it was famous for ale, not. for its. vintages, and I think
so still: but that does not forbid the admission that some of the
terraces were really used for vine-growing. In some places in this
county, as at Wilcote, Bremhill, Chadenwich (near Mere), Colerne,
Tockenham Wick, and others, the name of “ The Vineyards” is tra-
ditionally preserved. In the city of Bath there is a street so called,
where no doubt the thing once existed : and it is quite true that some
of the more regular sets of terraces on the sides of the downs do very
much resemble those on wine-growing hills abroad. But there are
hundreds of these ledges, o¢ running in sets, but in twos and threes,
or singly, everywhere and anywhere all about the downs, just under
the brow, in the middle, at the very foot, which appear to have been —
formed by the same cause and same process as that which formed _
:
:
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.8.A. 293
the more regular stairs. The vineyard explanation will hardly apply
to these, and in short, as a general account of Wiltshire lynchets, I
for one, cannot accept it.
Well, then we are told that. if not for vineyards, still they are
artificial, and have been made, formed by art and the hand and
labour of man, for agricultural purposes of other kinds, for which
arable land is wanted.
This, again, may be perfectly. true of some of them, and indeed I
have been told by more than one friend that they have known such
a terrace made by continual ploughing. But before any person
forms a decided opinion, or any opinion at all upon the subject, only
let him go about and carefully examine, not one or two, but a large
number, over a wide surface of country. He will find the shapes
and directions of these terrace-banks most perplexing in their
variety. Sometimes they are very strongly marked; sometimes
very faintly. Sometimes they run, not horizontally across, but
downwards from. the top to.the bottom. This is the case at Heale.
I remember Mr. Fane once showing me at Boyton a very remarkable
specimen, a long winding. hollow slope, falling gradually from the
top of the down into the vale. The floor of this sloping descent was:
arable, and alongside of it, on each side a few feet above it, was a,
grass terrace walk, looking, for all the world, like an artificial grass
path. He challenged me to explain it. I could only suggest the
same origin as I shall venture to do for the greater part of the rest.
Sometimes, when looking at a set of these terraces, you will notice
that in the centre they are rather thicker, thinning off towards the
end on either side, meeting sometimes at the end in one point, like
four or five blades of a fan, and dying away imperceptibly into the
hill. Sometimes, I am told, though I do not happen myself to have
‘seen it, they appear on opposite sides of a hollow or valley, exactly
corresponding with one-another. Wherever that occurs, a geologist
- would say the strata now opposite were once joined, and that the
intervening part has vanished. One thing is specially to be noted,.
that they generally follow the outline ‘of the main hill on the side
_ of which they are found, which at once makes it probable that both
they and the hill received their shapes at one and the same time,
294 The Vale of Warminster.
and from one and the same cause. When they are found quite at the
very foot of the hill, sweeping round it, and nearly on the very
level of the vale, it becomes simply inconceivable why anybody
should go to the trouble and expense of making them.
I used a few years ago to have upon this subject friendly discussion
with a neighbour, a very distinguished geologist, the late Mr.
Poulett Scrope. He maintained that these terraces grew, that he
had watched their growth, and others have told me the same thing.
I will give you, as well as I can, his own explanation.
There is, in this county, a great deal, and there used to be a great
deal more, of what is called “common field,” 7.e., large tracts of
unenclosed arable, held in “ severalty,” not unlike our modern Poor
Allotments—strips or pieces, held, either by different persons, or,
may be, three or four, by one and the same person. The strips are
marked off from one another, not by hedge or wall, but by a simple
grass path, a foot or so wide, which they call “ balks ” or “ meres.”
Mr. Poulett Scrope used to take for his argument one of these
“common fields.” It slopes gradually and gently: and is divided
into breadths, crossing the slope horizontally—not down the hill.
Supposing such a field to be divided into breadths for the first time,
the measurer, in marking off your piece from mine, would turn up
a double furrow, or leave a grass path, which you please. Mr.
Scrope maintained that the loose and lighter soil in each breadth
would be washed down, by degrees, towards the double furrow, or -
grass walk, and there be stopped. This, going on year after year,
would increase, till at last each grass path would be loaded with
accumulated soil, enough to give it the appearance of a bank or
terrace face, dividing each strip from the one below it. He had
watched this, he said, on his own land ; and this he called the growth
of terraces.
It is, of course, quite intelligible, that banks should be formed in
this way, in certain places, and under certain circumstances. But
those cases would be comparatively few, viz., where the ground
slopes very gradually, and where the strips are of considerable
breadth. In other cases, where the hill falls precipitously, and the
terraces are very narrow, and come close and quick one upon the
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, ¥.S.A. 295
other, like a steep staircase, that they could ever be formed according
to Mr. Poulett Scrope’s idea, seems to myself a simple impossibility.
Then how were they formed? In answering the question, just
recollect the general appearance of the downs. As you now see
them they are covered with a close green sward which fits very tight,
and shows to a nicety the shape of the ground on which it grows.
Suppose for a moment, that just in the same way in which you whip off
the outer skin of a mushroom, or peel a ripe fig, you could tear away
at one jerk, the whole green surface of South Wiltshire, what would
you see? You would find a vast area of dried white mud ; not flat,
but eaten into bays and hollows and basins, semicircular and circular
amphitheatres, long combes or inclined planes, sloping most gradually
and winding their way down from the summit of the hill to the
level plain below; no sharp angles or projecting points, but all
sweeping and curving smoothly. These smoothly-curving outlines
show that they can only have been formed by the action of water
upon that white mud when in a soft state. And in that soft state
they were when they were under the sea, which I need not say to
geological hearers, covered the whole in ages gone by. If you could
draw off the waters of the Mediterranean, or any other present sea,
‘you would find as much variety in the surface of the floor of it as
_ you now find on our present dry land, which was once the floor of
a sea. There are, in every present sea, under-currents and tides
flowing in every direction, eating and wearing away hollows and
basins and slanting combes: exactly as tides and under-currents
once wore away the sides of those downs, as drawn upon the map
before you. These chalk hills are composed of Jayers of chalk of a
few feet thick one upon another, of different quality, some fiuer,
some coarser, some softer, some harder; and my own belief is, that
these banks and ridges which you see running up, and down, and
along, sometimes singly, sometiines in twos or threes, or it may be
dozens, one upon the other, are simply layers of chalk rather harder
than the rest, which have resisted the action of the water, whilst.
the softer portions of them have been washed away. Itis, I believe,
the opinion of many geologists, that to whatever extent these terraces
or banks may have been subsequently enlarged, or made more even,
296 The Vale of Warminster.
by the plough or spade, for agricultural purposes, the greater part
of them were, in the first instance, the result of the action of water,
in the manner and under the circumstances above described. I
lately noticed, near Chaddleworth, in Berkshire, ranning along the
side of a down, for half-a-mile, a whole series of such banks ; ¢erraces,
if I may so speak, in embryo—not yet meddled with by the plough
or spade, but their lines perfectly brought out by light and shadow :
and quite capable of being made into terraces, if it were worth the
while. I have also seen others, now under plough, but so narrow
towards the end that the plough could no longer turn, leaving the
ends accordingly under turf.
The best way is, as I have already said, to study these things
on a large scale, and with our own eyes. In the course of the ex-
cursions, you will have the opportunity perhaps of noticing some of
the features described. Near Mere, more particularly, there is one
of the most extraordinary and curious assemblage of these terraces
that I have ever seen. It is worth while, to those who care about
such matters, to make a journey thither on purpose. There is a
complete amphitheatre, certainly not less than two miles in cir-
cumference, in which the sides of the downs that form it are abso-
lutely scored with these banks: some of them divided one from
another by a steep slope of twenty feet or more. To have made
all these from the very beginning for the sake of recovering a few
acres of arable ground would have required simply an enormous
outlay of money: which alone seems to say that they are, in the
main, the handiwork of Nature.
In the northernmost parts of Wilts, where we have no such a
thing as chalk, but hills of oolite or building stone of various quality,
there are also to be seen dedges like those about the downs. In one
or two cases where they immediately adjoin an old castle gate, as at
Farleigh Castle, they have no doubt been formed by some proprietor
on the side of a very steep rocky hill as ornamental walks for a
pleasure ground or orchard. But I also know of valleys where the
bottom is as nearly flat as possible, and yet there are, running on
each side, and projecting a foot or two above the lowest level of the
ground, long ledges, which it is impossible to imagine that anybody in
et. See A ee
Oe gt
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.S.A. 297
his senses could ever have been at the trouble and expense of making,
because there was no reason for making them. The explanation there
ee ee
is just the same as here. Some harder layer has resisted the action
of the sea that was over it.
Of parallel roads, 7.e., roads corresponding to one another on
opposite sides of valleys, there are some very extraordinary instances
in Scotland and elsewhere. The exact process of their formation
has of course been a subject of much discussion among geologists.
But they are, generally speaking, on a very large scale, to which
our Wiltshire banks and terraces are comparatively trifling.
I pass now from the sides of your downs, to their summit, where
we find mysterious landmarks crossing and intersecting the surface
of the downs in such a way as to denote occupation at some former
time.
British Serrtements.—Nothing can be more delightful than the
air upon the downs of Wiltshire. Equestrians seek it for a gallop,
pedestrians can walk there twice as long as they can in the low
country or in the woods. Invalids take up their quarters (where
they can find any) upon Salisbury: Plain, and in a few weeks, or
even days, they are new persons.
But that is quite a different thing from living continually and
without interruption up in those airy regions all the year round.
It is difficult to believe that this was ever done; but upon the
surface of the downs there are, in many places, lines and banks, and
marks of land-division ; also hollows, or pits, sometimes in many
hundreds close together, as at the place called Pen-pits, beyond
Stourhead. That, by the way, is a very remarkable place, and well
worth going to look at, by those who take the least interest in these
_ things. All these pits, hollows, lines and banks, are considered to
be traces of the habitations of some very ancient occupiers of this
country. We have, in reality, no account of these early folk, and
_ therefore, after all, it is only by examining and digging that we can
conjecture what these pits and boundary marks have been.
_ Sir R. C. Hoare, who studied these matters for many years, at-
tributes these irregular surfaces to those ancient people, especially
where the grass is greener and the soil turned up by the moles is of
4
298 “te Vale of Warminster.
a dlacker tint than elsewhere. In such places, he says, on turning
up the soil will be found convincing proofs of ancient residence,
such as animal bones, pottery, brick tiles, and coins of the lower
empire. Such are the certain marks which led him to call them
old British settlements.
The same marks which guided Sir R. C. Hoare are still left upon
the surface of the same downs to guide other inquirers. And there
is, really and truly, no information to be obtained about these things
except what the greener grass, the blaeker soil, the pottery, and the
coins, ean themselves tell us.
Sir R. C. Hoare, in his magnificent volumes upon Ancient
Wiltshire, gives us a description of no less than forty-eight different
places, all over the Wiltshire Downs, where he has found these
marks of ancient habitation: and this, without including any
military encampment.
Whether the people lived in these places permanently, or merely
only for a part of the year—I should suppose the latter, on account
of water—one cannot say. I believe that to this day in Wales they
go up into the mountains for the sake of summer pastures, and
remain there till cold weather returns. It may have been the case
that when so much of the country under the hills was forest, as it
was to a very great extent, there was no other place to live in.
Very likely they lived, as Cesar reports, by hunting and ranging
wherever they chose. Digging and spade-work they hated, and
therefore they are not likely, I think, to have made the terraces
(above-mentioned) for cultivation, though some people think they did.
In course of time they vanished, and the Vale of Warminster,
like all the rest of the country, must have passed into the hands of
some settled despotic authority, at some very remote period indeed,
in order to be brought into shape, manageable by civilized and
social rights ; in fact, into the shape, as to subdivision into parishes,
which we have at this day. When exactly that was done is lost in
obscurity, but whoever he was that had the power of dividing it, was a
very good carver. He carved fairly. If he had a loin of mutton for
dinner I will answer for it that he did not cut it in the selfish, unfair
way; helping himself and two or three particular friends to slices
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.S.4. 299
of the best all down the length of the loin, leaving the sides and
the bone to anybody. But he cut his loin of mutton across, so that
each person should have a fair help—a bit of best lean, a bit of fat,
and bit of bone. How do we know this? Why, look how the
parishes lie in the Vale of Warminster. Not long-wise down the
vale, but across it. I do not know it well enough to say whether
all do, but I am sure a great many do, not only in this, but in other
vales in Wiltshire ; that of Pewsey, certainly. There they run across
in comparatively narrow strips up on to the downs at each side,
so that the cultivator of each farm has his water-meadow, his pasture,
his arable, his wood, his water, and his down—his fat, his lean, his
skin, his bone, share and share alike.
All South Wilts, geologically described, is one large expanse of
chalk surface, with long narrow vales at considerable intervals. In
the vales, and nowhere else, are the rivers. Consequently as soon
as the wild old people who lived on the downs by hunting, and
scorned the drudgery of digging, had disappeared, their more sensible
successors settled near the water in the valleys. They cultivated
the slopes of the downs, and left the downs themselves for sheep and
cows. The chief landowner then having severed a certain quantity
of acres for his own demesne, let all the rest, I believe, originally in
small holdings, each man having his few acres of pasture inclosed
and certain acres of arable in the common field. This common field
system existed all over England; but it gave way by degrees to
inclosure. I observed, however, by a Return to Parliament last
year, that there is still more common field left in the county of Wilts
than in any other: the quantity being about 23,000 acres, or 5000
more than in any other.
There is a curious circumstance connected with ponds on the chalk
downs, not generally known. Whether it is or is not the case in
South Wilts I cannot say, but in North Wilts, as at Tan Hill and
on Hackpen, ponds for sheep, when made upon the highest part of
the chalk downs, are found to keep up the supply of water better
than those made in the lower grounds. Gilbert White (Hist. of
_ Selborne) mentions them on the Sussex downs, by the name of
~ “Dew Ponds.”
300 The Vale of Warminster.
Chalk, as it is found naturally is not a good basis for holding
water: water runs through it as through a sieve. The bottom of
these ponds is therefore “ puddled ” with clay, straw, and a layer of
chalk.
The difficulty is to fill them the first time. This is done at the
first downfall of snow, which is heaped into the pond: after this is
melted and there is water, the supply is kept up by the clouds and
dew (attracted by the water there), no matter how many sheep
drink. :
Mr. Davis (Wilts Agriculture, p. 13, edit. 1811) recommends the |
high ground. “ Much expense [he says] would be saved in sheep- ,
ponds, if care were taken to dig them on the highest points of the
hills. They are kept there free from the running of dirt into them,
are kept full by rain and fogs; and by loose stones laid upon the
rammed chalk are less liable to injury by the tread of sheep or cattle,
as well as less subject to damage by heat or frost.”
In some cases, perhaps the reason why water will “hold” (as
they say) better on the tops of Wiltshire downs, may be this: the
chalk stratum which overlies South Wilts was formerly itself overlaid
by other strata, gravels, sands, and clays. ‘The greater part of those
overlying strata have been entirely washed away, leaving only here
and there fragments of themselves. It has been already mentioned
that Grovely and Savernake Forests grow chiefly on such overlying
gravels and sands. There is a hill near Everley, called Cidbury : an
outlier, or lonely hill, like Cley Hill, entirely of chalk, except the
top, which consists of a complete bed of gravel pebbles, round and
smooth ; reminding one of what we used to call at school a black
cap pudding—i.e., a mass of pudding, with a layer (and we thought
it a very thin layer) of currants at the top. Now, on the highest
top of some of these chalk hills you find brickyards, as on the down
near Highclere, Lord Carnarvon’s. This is a portion of a former
overlying statum of clay ; so that one reason why ponds on the tops
of the hills hold water so well, may be, because there is some part
of the clay stratum still left there.
- Iam not going to inflict upon you a dissertation upon the stock
and husbandry of your neighbourhood; but as we are treating the
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.S.A. 301
subject archeologically, I may mention that the sheep, which you
know so well as Southdowns, are not the original sheep of Wiltshire.
The old sheep was that which was well known as the Wiltshire
horned sheep, with large twisted horns. Some say it was not the
very original, but they do not tell us what came before it. The
_ Southdown sheep was introduced here from Sussex, only about
_ ninety years ago, by a Mr. Mighell, of Kennet, and I believe that
Mr. Thomas Davis, then steward at Longleat, and a Mr. Wood, of
Longbridge Deverel, were great promoters of the new breed.
Then, your pigs! If I were to stop anybody in the street in
London, Dublin, or Edinburgh, and ask him suddenly, “ Pray, Sir,
what is Wiltshire famous for?” an intelligent man would of course
_ immediately say, “Stonehenge.” If that did not occur to his
memory, he would certainly say, “‘ bacon.” Long may your county
be famous for both. But your reputation for bacon was not earned
by your present pig. Your present pig, with his fine skin, short
snout, and cunning eye, is a China pig, or black African. The old
pig, the archeological pig, was quite a different fellow. Large,
_ white, long-eared: you fatted him well with corn: you kept him
till he was a year-and-a-half, sometimes two years old, and then you
killed him, and dried him with wood. Firmness is desired in bacon ;
age gives that firmness. The present sort fatten sooner, and in
delicacy of flesh are suverior; but they are better for york than
bacon ; and bacon, remember, is the basis of your reputation.
_ Another archeological curiosity is the Orcheston Grass : mentioned
by several old writers, as Thomas Fuller, Norden, and others.
Fuller, in 1662, calls it “ Knot-Grasse, growing at Master Tucker’s
[i.e., Tooker’s] at Maddington : of the ninety species of grasses in
England the most marvellous; he had been told 24 feet long: which
May be true, because as there are giants among men, so there are
giants among giants, which even exceed them in proportion.” Itis
‘deseribed in Cox’s Magna Britannia (Wilts p. 165), as “ Gramen
caninum supinum longissimum. Long trailing dog grass: found at
Maddington, nine miles from Salisbury : will fat hogs, and is some
it 25 foot long.” .
This is the once famous Orcheston Grass: growing in the side
302 The Vale of Warminster.
valley of Winterbourn Stoke, up to Orcheston. There are two
small meadows—(I have not been at the place and am taking this
from a printed aecount)—adjoining each other, containing about
two-and-a-half acres: but the crop is something immense.
There has been a great deal written about this grass, and many
attempts made to propagate it; and many ‘skilful botanists have
visited the place without discovering which was the long grass, so
different was its appearance at different seasons.
Mr. Davis (above-mentioned), who wrote a volume on Wiltshire
agriculture, says that it was at last ascertained to be nothing more
than “black couch,”—one of the worst grasses in its native state
that the kingdom produces, and a great plague to the farmers. It is
only found on poor worn-out lands, so wiry and coarse that cattle will
not eat it, and forms a thick tough covering over the lands, pre-
serving itself, but destroying everything else. But in those meadows,
when fed abundantly with water, it it of a juicy nourishing quality,
and makes the most desirable hay in the district, particularly for
sheep. The substratum of the meadows, curiously enough, is an
almost entire bed of loose flints, in which the roots of grass run
freely—sending out shoots, which take root at the joints, send out
other shoots, and so on over and over again: so that the stalk is
frequently eight or ten feet in length from the original root: and
though the crop is exceedingly thick, it is perhaps not 18 inches in
height. The same grass grows in other meadows, but its quality
and quantity entirely depend upon the supply of water.
I will add, that for the purpose of this paper, I wrote a day or
two ago for some information, and was kindly told that the grass is
called Poa Trivialis: that as regards the length of it, it is entirely
changed since the water has been dammed up to make the adjoining
lands into water-meadows; which result is only partially accom-
plished, as it depends upon the uncertain rise of the springs. Another
correspondent, however, says that the average length of the grass
is about 16 or 17 feet. It is not cultivated, but is natural to the soil.
III. Tue Lanevace.
Among the archeological features of any district, one cannot omit
aCe rf
mete ns crite
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.8.A. 303
the peculiarities of language, for certainly the words and phrases
used, and handed down for generations, can boast as fair an antiquity
as anything else.
I do not know a more difficult situation for a person to be placed
in—and having been placed in it myself, I can vouch for the fact—
than for a young man, educated up to twenty-three years of age in
the elegant phraseology of classical Oxford, to be put down as a
curate in a country village, say in Wiltshire—say, if you please, in
the Vale of Warminster. I remember once, upon my first intro-
duction in that character, not many miles from where we are, having
some pastoral rebuke to administer to an old man grubbing a hedge.
I addressed my lecture in the language I had been used to at Alma
Mater. He did not make any answer, and I fondly thought that I
had produced a deep impression ; at last, he quietly turned his head
and said, “ What’s that as you do zay, zur?” I should like to hear
a Wiltshire boy who had been three years at plough or sheep fold,
cross examine one of Her Majesty’s Inspectors of Schools, and ask
him, in the article of a plough, to be so good as to explain the
difference between the vore-shoot and back shoot, the ground rest,
the bread board, the drail, the wing and point, and the whippence:
or the riders and tines of a harrow, or the raves and spances and peel
of a waggon. The learned inspector would also be not a little
puzzled to hear a farmer give an order for the plough “to go for
coal.” That may, perhaps, not be understood by everybody here.
The team of oxen that drew the plough came to be called the plough,
and in some parts of South Wilts they still call even a waggon and
horses a plough. This is needful for you to know, in case your man
should some day tell you that the plough is gone for coal.
In the article of sheep what strange nomenclature! Besides the
sintelligible names of ram, ewe and lamb, we have wether hogs, and
chilver hogs, and shear hogs, ram teg’s, and theaves, and two-tooths,
and four-tooths, and six-tooths. So strange is the confusion that
the word hog is now applied to any animal of a year old, such as a
hog bull, a chilver hog sheep. ‘“ Chilver” is a good Anglo-Saxon
_ word, “ cylfer,” and means female,so a chilver hog sheep simply means,
in the dialect of the Vale of Warminster, a female lamb a year old.
VOL. XVII.—NO. LI. Z
304 The Vale of Warminster.
The “fossels’”? means the fold-shores, or the stakes to which the
hurdles are shored up, and fastened with a loose twig wreath at the
top,
Of course one might continue these examples of provincialism to
any extent. It really takes a very long time to learn all the words
and phrases of the country ; and even now, after a good many years’
familiarity with Wiltshire pronunciation, I am sometimes: still
obliged to return the compliment originally paid to myself, and to
say to some old fellow, if not in words, at least in my thoughts,
what an old fellow once said to me— What's that as you do say, Sir?
TV. Tue Porvutation.
Taking a farewell glance at the whole of the Vale of Warminster,
containing (to speak m round numbers) say twenty-eight or thirty
parishes—more or less: all of which lie in a contiguous chain, owing
to the geological necessity of the case, there is one question arises,
and it is the last which I have to submit to your judgment, viz. :
whether there are more people living in it now than there were five
hundred years ago? Our cities and towns have, of course, increased
enormously: but is the agricultural population, in this, and similar
districts, greater, or is it less, or is it about the same ?—and I apply
the question to other similar districts pure/y in the country. My own
opinion upon the matter is, that the rwra/ population was quite as
large, and, in some parts, larger than it is now. One reason for my
saying so is this:—In examining the old records, such as the very
ancient rental books and court rolls of some monasteries, especially
Malmesbury Abbey (once owner of almost every parish in its im-
mediate neighbourhood, all of which I am tolerably familiar with) :
in examining the rental books, which gives the name of every tenant,
I have noticed, that in some very small hamlets there were, in
Edward the Second’s reign, five hundred years ago, more persons
paying rent than there are in those very hamlets now. When people
pay rent it is generally for something which they occupy in the
place—cottage, house, or land. So, as there were more rent-payers,
I suppose there were more people.
Another reason why there should have been more, is this :—The
By the Rev. Canon Jackson, F.S.A. 805
lands in ancient times were in very small holdings indeed. This is
more evident in North Wilts, because the small inclosures tell the
tale, not so distinctly told in open unenclosed country. In course
of time, in Henry VII., and especially after the Dissolution of
Monasteries, these small holdings were thrown into farms, larger
and larger. The small homesteads would be pulled down, and the
people must have disappeared : i.¢., the population resident would
hecome fewer. The inclosing went on at a great rate all through
the seventeenth century. John Aubrey, who lived at that time,
says that even within his remembrance, “a world of labourers had
been maintained by the plough, but had been dispossessed.”
The late Mr. William Cobbett, in his amusing work, called
“Rural Rides,” frequently refers to this subject,and in his interesting
description of his ride along this vale, lays great stress upon the
number and size both of the Churches and churchyards within it,
as evidence of the fact that at the remote period when they were
made the population must have been “ numerous, great and opulent.”
But his references to the different parishes are so confused, and his
statements as to the size of some of the Churches so ridiculously
exaggerated, indeed so absolutely false, as to render his conclusions
upon the subject (so far as regards this part of his tour) very un-
satisfactory. .
_I will bring my paper to an end with the impressions which
Warminster left upon his mind ; and I trust they may not be found
as inaccurate as his other observations :—“ Before I speak of my
ride from Warminster to Devizes, I must once more observe, that
Warminster is a very nice town: everything belonging to it is solid
and good. There are no villanous gingerbread houses running up,
and no nasty, shabby-genteel people; no women trapsing about
with showy gowns and dirty necks; no Jew-looking fellows, with
dandy coats, dirty shirts and half-heels to their shoes. A really
nice and good town. It is a great corn market, one of the greatest
in this part of England. Besides the corn market, I was delighted,
and greatly surprized to see the meat. Not only the finest vea/ and
lamb that I had ever seen in my life, but so exceedingly beautiful,
‘that I could hardly believe my eyes. I am a great connoisseur in
Zz 2
306 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin.
joints of meat: a great judge, if five-and-thirty years of experience
can give sound judgment. I verily believe that I have bought and
roasted more whole sirloins of beef than any man in England. I
know all about the matter: a very great visitor of Newgate market :
in short, though a very little eater, ] am a very great provider. It is
afancy; I like the subject, and, therefore, I understand it: and with
all this knowledge of the matter, I say, I never saw veal and lamb
half so fine as that I saw in Warminster. The town is famous for
fine meat, and I knew it, and therefore I went out in the morning |
to look at the meat.”
Our dinner being now ready you will have an opportunity of
putting Mr. Cobbett’s praises to the test.
J. E. Jackson.
SOME ACCOUNT OF
The Cavern Signs of Wiltshire and theiv Origu. —
By the Rey, A. C. Smrrn.
(Read before the Society at Warminster, August, 1877.)
T may not be generally recognized, but it is none the less
<2 | true, that a great. deal of local history is embodied in some
of the old tavern signs of England ; and if we could trace back the
origin of some of our older sign-boards which swing before the more
established houses of public entertainment in this county, we should
discover a mine of information, where we little expected it, in regard
to the ownership of lands, or the pre-eminence of some family for
the time being in their several localities. Perhaps this may seem
at first sight a somewhat rash assertion; and it may be said that
By the Rev. A. C. Smith. 307
when a landlord opens a new tavern, he selects his sign solely from
his own private fancy, and with no ulterior intention: and indeed
if we were discussing the question with regard to modern times, I
incline to think that such is very much the case. But I am bold
to maintain, that, if we look back to the origin of sign-boards, and
indeed to the origin of houses of public entertainment themselves,
we shall find that a very different state of things governed the whole
proceeding; and this, I think, is a matter which well deserves the
attention of the archeologist.
To refer to the origin of inns in England, we shall have to go back
+o a somewhat distant period. Macaulay tells us that in the reign
of Elizabeth, the English inns were notorious for their excellent and
even luxurious accommodation, in which they far surpassed the great
hostelries of the Continent: while Chaucer describes in brilliant
colours the admirable entertainment they afforded to the pilgrims
of the fourteenth century. How far beyond that we may push our
enquiries, I am unable to define with accuracy, though I have a
strong presumption that the period referred to in the Canterbury
Tales is not far from the limit of their general introduction. Certain
at any rate it is, that, previous to the establishment of a house of
public entertainment in any locality, the noble’s, or squire’s mansion
of the neighbourhood did its duty, and more or less hospitably pro-
vided hoard and lodging for the wayfarer, whoever he might be, who
erayed food and shelter; just as was the universal custom in the
more remote districts of Scotland not so very long since, and as I
myself many times experienced during a tour in Norway, seven-and-
twenty years ago, when that thinly-peopled but most charming
country was but little visited by travellers, and houses of public en-
tertainment were as yet almost unknown.
_ It will be readily seen that when the chief house of the district
entertained all comers, travellers would not have been very numerous.
‘Those were the days of bad roads and scanty locomotion, good old-
fashioned stay-at-home times, when a journey to the county-town,
ten miles off, was a feat to be remembered and talked off; anda
journey of fifty miles was a really serious and even perilous matter,
not to be undertaken without much preparation: sometimes, we are
308 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin.
told, involving the winding up of his affairs, and making of his will,
before the prudent traveller would venture himself on so hazardous
an enterprize. But when civilization increased, and people began
to make more frequent journeys, the custom of providing accommo-
dation for strangers would become more and more irksome to the
entertainer; and the next step would be to set up a hostelry, which
should provide entertainment for all travellers at a reasonable rate
of charge. Then who so likely to be placed in the position-of land-
lord of the newly-established inn as some retainer or vassal of the
noble or lord of the manor, who caused such house of entertainment
to be opened? and what so likely to be the sign of the hostelry thus
established as the coat of arms of the same patron ?
But the coat of arms of his noble lord or patron was not the only
sign which the obsequious host need adopt: he might do equal
homage to his superior, and the compliment paid him would be no
less striking, if he adopted his crest: while, as a matter of con-
venience, both as regarded the local painter, who was not always a
very proficient artist; and as regarded the general public, whose
memories and understandings were not highly developed, the single
emblem which formed the crest was more easily mastered and
recollected than an elaborate, and to the uneducated mind meom-
prehensible, coat of arms. Hence arose that vast catalogue of
zoological and botanical signs, selected from almost every depart-
ment of the animal and vegetable kingdoms ; some of which sound
so strangely in our ears, but which are merely the rude translation
into our every-day vernacular of the precise descriptions of the
Herald’s College. Thus the Golden Lion, at Swindon; and the
Golden Swan, at Wilcot; the White Bear at Devizes; the White
Hart, at Salisbury and twenty other places in the county ; the White
Lion, at Westbury, Malmesbury, and elsewhere; the White Swan,
at Warminster, Enford, Marlborough, and Trowbridge; the Black
Dog, at Lavington, Donhead St. Mary, and Chilmark; the black
Swan, at Devizes; and the Black Horse, eleven times repeated in the
county; the Blwe Lion, at Collingbourne Ducis, and the Blue Boar,
at Aldbourne ; the Green Dragon, at Market Lavington, Malmesbury,
Barford St. Martin, and Marlborough; the Red Lull, at Broken-
By the Rev. A. C. Smith. . 309
borough; and the Red Lion, which is represented fourteen times in
the county ; are simply the several animals painted in their heraldic
colours, or, argent, sable, azure, vert, or gules. So that, however dis-
tressing to the mind of the naturalist, if he comes to reflect on it,
may be the notion of a blue lion, or a golden swan ; to those versed in
the language of heraldry, a lion azure, and a swan or, seem not only
legitimate, and present no anomaly, but are perfectly correct ; while
to the unthinking: public one colour would be as good as another.
There are at the present moment in the county of Wilts some
seven hundred taverns, and they comprehend every variety of sign-
board, from the grand and imposing to the trivial and grotesque.
In order to. ascertain. their several proportions, I have classified them
under various heads, and. I propose to consider them under these
nine conventional divisions :—
(1) The Heraldic. (6) The Incomprehensible.
(2) The Loyal. (7) The Singular.
(3) The Religious or Ecclesiastical. (8) Miscellaneous.
(4) The Professional. (9) The Prosaic.
(5) The Sporting.
In examining the particulars of these several divisions, it is not
a little curious to see the bent of the public mind, as it has developed
itself in our sign-boards at various times, and in one locality and
another: and, though it is of course frequently quite impossible to
trace the origin of a particular sign, there are certain broad principles
which seem to have left their mark in these emblems, and (taken in
a lump) they represent in no small degree the tone of feeling which
(it may be presumed) predominated in that precise district, at the:
time they severally started into being.
_ (1) The Heraldic of right occupies the first place in my catalogue.
‘not only because it ranks first in priority of time—for I make bold to.
‘say that at the first institution of hostelries, every sign-board’ was.
heraldic—but also because in Wiltshire it still holds the first place
in priority of numbers. Thus, by way of example, we have the
Bath Arms, at Warminster; the Ai/esbury Arms, at Marlborough ;
Lansdowne Arms, at Calne; the Pembroke Arms, at Wilton ;
310 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin
the Suffolk Arms, at Malmesbury: and not only in regard to noble
lords, but in like manner we have the Longs Arms, at Steeple
Ashton, Keevil and Wraxall; the Wyndham Arms, at Dinton; the
Goddard Arms, at Swindon and Clyffe Pypard; the Penruddocke
Arms, at Barford St. Martin; the PAipps Arms, at Westbury; the
Benett Arms, at Tisbury; and a host of others, which I might
mention; all pointing to the great Wiltshire families which flourished
when those several inns were established, and (I am happy to say)
still flourish in all the instances I have enumerated, and in many
similar cases too, in their respective localities. Indeed these are but
samples of many other equally honoured Wiltshire worthies, whose
several coats of arms, adopted by the landlord of the principal hos-
telry in the place, attest the position and influence of the lord of
the manor, or squire of the district; and I venture to say that if
the aggregate area of the combined domains of these large landed
proprietors, whose arms still decorate our sign-boards, could be
reckoned, it would be found that a very considerable portion of our
county was still in their hands: while of some few which, in the
vicissitudes of families, have dwindled and decayed, the coat of
arms, swinging over the village inn, alone remains, a melancholy
memorial of a bygone greatness.
I find that, scattered over the length and breadth of our county,
no less than fifty-six sign-boards attest such manorial influence of
the landed proprietors, with whose coats of arms they are severally
charged, and who are thus readily identified. Sometimes, however,
a portion only of such coat of arms survives, the remainder having
completely vanished ; as an instance of which I would mention the
well-known “ Cats,’? at Charlton, on the Devizes and Andover road,
the said “cats” being the rustic and-more familiar designation of
the two leopards which supported the arms of the Poore family,
once the chief landowners in that district.
But who shall count the number of sign-boards which exhibit the
crest or cognizance of old Wiltshire families, which are oftentimes
difficult to trace, and frequently derive their origin from a period of
which (so far at least as local tradition goes) the records are scanty,
or obscure, or non-existent. By way of example of such coats or
By the Rev. A. C. Smith. 811
badges, I would point out that the White Hartpwith gold chain, was
the cognizance of King Richard II.; the WAite Swan, with a duke’s
coronet round its neck, that of Henry IV.; the Blue Boar, that of
Richard III.; the Red Dragon, that of Henry VII., who adopted
that device for his standard on Bosworth Field; the Crowned Lion,
the badge of Henry VIII.; and the Zag/le, that of Queen Mary.
Loyal landlords would sometimes prefer to the King’s Arms the
crest of their sovereign, and hence the prevalence of these and similar
signs. But besides this, we may be sure that if the occupants of
the throne thought fit to adopt such crests or badges, their example
was followed by their loyal subjects throughout the length and
breadth of the land; and this was without doubt the most prolific
origin of the many various zoological signs which are to be met
with throughout the county. But I must not delay longer on this
portion of my subject ; enough if I claim for the first, or heraldic,
division (coats of arms, portions of coats of arms, and crests), about
one hundred and fifty of the tavern signs of Wiltshire.
(2) Next in order stand the “ Loyal” emblems ; for Wiltshire was
ever constant to the throne: and so the sign of the “ Crown,” as
the emblem and ornament of royalty, was the chief favorite with
loyal subjects: we find it at this moment repeated no less than
twenty-five times in this county; while, coupled with the “ Rose,”
the national emblem, it occurs fourteen times more.
Next to it in point of numbers stands the “ Royal Oak,” a great
favourite ever since the Restoration, commemorating Charles the
Second’s escape at Boscobel; repeated in Wiltshire twenty-one
times. Then we have the “ King’s Arms,” eighteen times, the
“ King’s Head,” seven; and the “ Queen’s Head,” eight times
repeated. The painting of the “ Royal Oak” is oftentimes a marvel
of village art: King Charles is always the most conspicuous figure
in the picture, usually represented as dressed in a bright scarlet
coat, and invariably wearing a colossal crown of gold, the inappro-
priateness of such marks of royalty for the moment of disguise being
boldly ignored by our village artists ; and verily the troopers riding
_ beneath must have been blind, if they failed to see so brilliant, so
_ attractive, and so conspicuous a gentleman,
312 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin.
In addition to the loyal signs mentioned above, there are ten
charged with the portrait of her present gracious Majesty; six of
the ‘ Prince of Wales,’ )esides several especially honouring his
‘* Feathers :”? moreover there are others of the “‘ Princess of Wales,”
and the “ Duke of Edinburgh.” Some of these last have been
transformed from former signs of the reigning monarch, by merely
altering the name: indeed it is worthy of remark that even to this
day in some places, and until very modern times most commonly, —
the striking features of Henry VIII. represented the sign of the
King’s Head, while the portrait of Elizabeth was the conventional
type for the Queen’s Head. For your British landlord moves with
the times, and Jacobite or Hanoverian, Tory or Whig, he is not
particular: a few touches with the painter’s brush transforms the
one into the other, and changes the dynasty, or the individual, in no
time. We have however the “ George,” in compliment to the kings
of that name, eleven times repeated ;! and there is at Salisbury the
sien of “ William IV.:’’ and (more remarkable) at Swindon, that
of the “ King of Prussia,” not however King William of present
renown, but “ King Frederick the Great,” the hero of Rosbach, and
our most honoured ally, who somehow contrived to become popular
in England, and whose portrait, with cocked hat and pig-tail com-
plete, used to be a very common emblem in this country. I reckon
the loyal sign-boards in the county, all told, at no less than a
hundred and thirty.
(3) The “ Religious” or “ Ecclesiastical” emblems require a little
more notice, because their original intention is in many cases ob-
scured, in others partly obliterated, and in some dropped out of
sight altogether. First and foremost in frequency of all the signs
used in the county stands the “ Bel/,’ which is repeated without
companionship no less than thirty-one times, and joined to the
“Crown” (evidently representing Church and State) three times
more; while united in a strange alliance with a “shoulder of mutton”
(at Swindon and Marlborough) yet twice more; making a total of
1 Some of these, however (perhaps the majority of them), more accurately
belong to the next, or ecclesiastical, division, having reterence to the Patron
Saint of England, rather than to the reigning sovereign.
By the Rev. A. C. Smith. 313
thirty-six times, a repetition which would savour something of
_ tiresome sameness, did it not mark the hearty love of the Church,
which once predominated throughout the county. Moreover we
have the sign of the ‘ Ring of Bells,” at North Bradley ; the “ Five
Bells,” at Salisbury ; and the “ Six Bel/s,” at Wilton and Colerne.
Then, leading us back to pre-Reformation times, we have the once
very favourite emblem of the “ Cross Keys’”’ (the arms of the Papal
see and the emblem of St. Peter and his successors), repeated no
less than thirteen times in our county.
There is also not far from Warminster, on the road between that
town and Salisbury (at a place called Dawdley), a hamlet now known
as “ Peler’s Finger,’ so called from an inn which once stood there,
bearing this quaint and (as far as is known) unique sign. It is
doubtless a relic of pre-Reformation days, when ecclesiastical symbols
were not only tolerated, but considered by no means out of place on
a tavern sign-board ; and as to its meaning, it doubtless alludes to
the benediction of the Pope. Then there is the “ Catharine Wheel,’’
still to be seen at Shrewton and Salisbury; once a very common
sign, till changed by the Puritans into “ Cat and Wheel,” it soon
became contracted into the “ Wheel.”
Again we have the “ Fleur-de-lis,’ at North Bradley, at one time
a favourite sign in English taverns, though but one example remains
in our county ; and we have the “ Sadutation Inn,” at Castle Combe,
strangely perverted from its original import, which was no less than
the Angel Gabriel saluting the Blessed Virgin, though now its in-
tention is forgotten, and it is usually represented by two hands
clasping each other.
_ The patron saint too of England is duly honoured (perhaps beyond
his merits) by our county; for, in addition to the “ George,” men-
tioned above, the “‘ George and Dragon” figures five times, and the
“Dragon” or “Green Dragon” five times more; and this was
_ eertainly one of the oldest heraldic charges in the kingdom, for
the dragon was well known as the West Saxon standard till the
_ time of William the Conqueror, and subsequently came into favour
“again as the supporter of the Tudor sovereigns.
The “ Angel,” in all probability derived from the Salutation Inn,
314 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin.
was another favourite sign of our ancestors, and still exists in eight
parishes in the county equally distributed through North and South
Wilts.
Again the ecclesiastical symbol of the “ Lamb” occurs eleven
times; while the “ Lamb and Flag” was to be seen not long since
at Swindon, though I understand it has now disappeared : this is to
be lamented, because, while the “ Lamb and Flag” formed the well-
known emblem of the Knights Templars, the sign at Swindon im-
proved upon the original design, by changing the banner into a
spear! Again, we have the ecclesiastical symbol of the “ Pelican,”
at Devizes, at Froxfield, and at Stapleford, near Wilton: and the
peculiar sign of the “ Organ”? may be seen at Warminster; and
the still more strange sign of “ Jacob’s Ladder” in the parish of
Stratton St. Margaret. This brings the sum of ecclesiastical or
religious sign-boards in our county to about one hundred.!
(4) Of the Professional emblems those relating to the twin services of
the Armyand Navy will not detain us long: they are eminently practi-
cal; they are not obscure; and they very plainly indicate the utilitarian
interests of Wiltshiremen ; who, if they sometimes indulged in military
or naval ardour, certainly did not mark it on their sign-boards. Thus
the military emblems are all comprehended in these four signs, the
“ Cross Guns,” at Avoncliff (Bradford) and Westwood ; the “ Zrooper,”
at Clack; and the quite modern signs of the “ Rifleman’s Arms,”
and the “ Volunteer.” Not much more pronounced are the naval
emblems (as perhaps might be expected in so thoroughly inland a
county) : we have indeed the “Anchor” at Warminster and Westbury ;
1 I am informed by Mr. Cunnington that there existed some years ago on the
Bath road, near Devizes, a sign-board on which was painted a woman without
a head, and which was called the ‘*‘ Quiet Woman,” or the ‘* Good Woman,” in
ungallant allusion to the excellence of silence in regard to the female tongue.
It is curious, however, to find that this sign (which in old times was not un-
common) was originally of ecclesiastical import, the headless trunk being the
conventional method of representing a Christian Martyr! Subsequentiy the
same device of the silent woman became a favourite oilman’s sign, and it is
conjectured to have been so adopted in reference to the heedless (head was
anciently pronounced heed) or foolish virgins of the parable, who had no oil in
their lamps when the bridegroom came. [See Larwood and Hotten’s Hist. of
Signboards,” p. 454, ]
By the Rev. A. C. Smith. 315
but as it is joined with “ Hope” at Trowbridge and Salisbury,
it may reasonably be doubted whether it is not an ecclesiastical
rather than a naval sign. We have the “Jolly Tar,” indeed at
Hannington, and the “ Ship” six times repeated, and the two signs
practically combined at Warminster under the figure of the “ Ship
and Punch-bowl.” But I fancy the “ Ship” is an honourable title
applied by courtesy to the humble craft which plies on our canals ;
as is honestly stated in the sign of the “ Barge,” at Melksham,
Marlborough, and Bradford. We have moreover the “ Bridge Inn,”
at West Lavington, Woodford, and Bishops Cannings.
The various trades are better represented. We have the arms of
the bakers, carpenters, masons, plumbers, weavers, carriers, wheel-
wrights: we have the “ Bleeding Horse,” representing the trade of
the farrier, at Ramsbury ; the “ Boot,’ at Westbury and Wardour,
and the “ Shoe,” at Plaitford and North Wraxall, representing that
of the cobbler. But (as might be anticipated) it is in Agricultural
emblems that the heart of the Wiltshireman revels! What more
intelligible to him than the “ Plough” or the “ Wheatsheaf?” the
former occurring eleven, the latter twelve times, as tavern signs, in
rural districts. Then the “ Waggon and Horses,’ four times; the
“ Pack-horse,” three times; the “‘ Wool-nack,’ three times; the
“ Harrow,” the “ Shears,” the “ Mait-shovel,” the “ Hop-pole,” the
“ Barleymow,” the “ Windmill,’ and the “ Shepherd’s Rest,” com-
plete the tale of this division, and bring its total number to about
eighty-five.
(5) The next division represents the “‘ Sporting”’ propensities of the
county, both of former and of modern days; and inasmuch as the
sports of olden time were in many respects different from those of
the present day, an examination of this section will very conclusively
prove what a tenacious hold the popular sign-board had on the
public mind; and though the pastime commemorated has long since
dropped out of use, the sign to which it gave rise, in very many
instances still flourishes. Now the old English sports comprehended
the favourite amusements (and cruel indeed and barbarous most of
them were) of bear-baiting, bull-baiting, cock-fighting, cock-
throwing, and falconry; as well as the hunting, coursing, racing,
316 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin.
shooting, and fishing, which are now in vogue. This will account
in part for the multiplicity of “ Bear” inns, though the bear was
also the cognizance of more than one wealthy landowner, and so
would have been adopted by his retainers on that account. Indeed
it is extremely difficult to distinguish signs borrowed from the
animal world, and those taken from heraldry ; though it may be
assumed as certain that all fantastically coloured signs are un-
questionably of heraldic origin. For the frequency then with which
the Bear inn is to be met with, there is little doubt that the savage
sport (!) of bear-baiting is the origin; and this seems the more
probable, when we notice that this sign, though eight times repeated
in the county, is confined to the towns or large villages, wherein
alone so expensive ar amusement would be held. We have the sign
of the Bear, in Wiltshire, at Devizes, Melksham, Chippenham, Box,
Malmesbury, Cricklade, Trowbridge, and Marlborough, which com-
prise most of the larger towns in the county, and the smallest of
which has a population of over two thousand.
To the same cause the ferocious sport (so called) of bull-baiting,
which was as popular in the towns of England in olden time, as the
bull-fight is in Spain at this day, we are indebted for the pl
favourite sign of the “ Bull.”
Then again we have the “ Cock,” than which no bird was more
wantonly ill-treated: for “the barbarous and wicked diversion of
throwing at cocks” (as Strutt rightly terms it) was a pastime
generally indulged in at all the wakes and fairs, which were held in
the early spring, more especially on Shrove Tuesday. We have the
“ Fighting Cocks,’ which speaks for itself; and the “ Falcon.”
Moreover we have the “ Stag,” and “ Stag’s Head ;” the “ Fox,” the
« Hor and Hounds,” the latter a very favourite sign for the last three
hundred years, and, so far as we can see, likely to be so for three
hundred years more: the “ Hare and Hounds ;” the “ Greyhound ;”
the “ Soho;” the “ Dog and Gun;” the “ Pheasant;” the “ Roe-
buck;” the “ Running Horse;” the “ Nog’s Head,” five times
repeated in the county, and of frequent occurrence throughout
England; though it is strange that the “ Horse’s Head” never
occurs; and lastly, the “ Black Horse,” represented eleven times in
By the Rev. A. C. Smith. 317
the county ; but the “White Horse” (which occurs ten times amongst
us), probably had its origin from another source, in many instances
at least; for it was not only the badge of the Saxons, as we in
Wiltshire know well enough, from cur familiarity with the figure
on our downs; but it was also the cognizance of the House of
_ Hanover, the record of which is in a similar way perpetuated in the
slopes of the downs near Weymouth : and in the cases of Bratton,
Edington, Compton Bassett, Wootton Bassett, and Cricklade, at all
events, the sign-boards charged with the figure of the “ White
Horse” (more or less rampant) must have had reference to their
-
counterparts, cut (with more or less skill) on the steep sides of the
chalk hills in their respective neighbourhoods. I calculate the
sporting emblems throughout the county to number in all about
seventy.
(6) I come now to the “ Incomprehensible” signboards of the
county, and I would ask what is the meaning of the “ Rattlebones,” at
Sherston Magna?! the “ Red Hat,” at Trowbridge ? or the “ Crooked
1The Rev. E. Awdry, Vicar of Kington St. Michael, has kindly drawn my
attention to the meaning of the ‘‘ Rattlebones ” sign, as given in Canon Jackson’s
Aubrey Collections, page 107. It appears that ‘* Rattlebone ” was a renowned
champion from the village of Sherston, who did much service against the
Danes; and there is a local tradition, still upheld with undiminished tenacity
by the villagers, that a small figure, outside the wall of the Church porch, re-
presents that formidable giant, as ‘‘ severely wounded in the fight, but heroically
_ applying a tile-stone to his stomach to prevent his bowels gushing out!” As
a matter of fact, the little figure on the Church wall is merely that of a priest,
in ecclesiastical dress, and holding a book against his breast: but village tra-
dition ignores fact, and does not the sign of the ‘‘ Ratt/ehones Inn” triumphantly
corroborate the tradition? There the figure is undoubtedly that of a warrior,
somewhat after the type of the Roman knight, with large sword, helmet, &c.,
complete; or as a Goliath of Gath is conventionally portrayed in the cheap
Prints for cottage walls.
_ As a pendant to the above tradition, I may as well here record another
“equally strange, which is generally accepted in the parish of Little Langford,
‘known in all that neighbourhood as ‘‘The Maid and the Maggot,” and implicitly
credited by all in that district. It is to the effect that a ‘‘ certain maid was
nutting in Grovely Wood in times gone by, and out of a nut came a maggot,
which she kept and fed, and which daily grew until it arose one day and killed
the maiden.” In proof of the authenticity of this curious tradition, the parish-
ione 's of Little Langford are also wont to point triumphantly to a certain
z on the Church porch, which they declare represents the occurrence. By
318 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin.
Billett,’ at Winterslow? the latter not unknown (it is true) in
other parts of England, but its intention has never yet been dis-
covered. What again of the “ Dumb Post,’ at Bremhill?! the
“ Cribbage Hut,’ at Sutton Mandeville ?? or the “ Crow’s Nest,” at
the courtesy of the Rector, the Rev. Vander-Meulen, to whom I applied for in-
formation, I learn that the carving on the Church represents a boar- hunt (boar,
dogs, and huntsmen complete), so that it is difficult to see the connection between
that and the tradition !
1The Rey. Canon Eddrup, in reply to my enquiries as to local tradition on the
name, kindly informs me that ten years ago there was standing near the “ Dumb
Post’ inn, at a place where four roads meet, an old finger-post, from which the
directing arms had long since rotted away, so that it was reduced to the con-
dition, so vexatious to the pedestrian, in a district with which he is not familiar,
of being a ‘‘dumb post” indeed! and the worthy Vicar of Bremhill amused
himself at the time by guessing that perhaps some local wit had indulged his
satirical propensities by borrowing from the old direction post a name for the
village inn hard by. Subsequent enquiry however showed that an inn bearing
the sign of the ‘‘ Dumb Post” has existed on the spot, as long as the oldest
inhabitant can remember; while the tradition of the house is that the inn
originally had no sign, but that the landlord of that day, compelled by cireum-
stances, though against his will, to give his house some distinctive sign,
named it—perhaps in jest, perhaps from annoyance—from some old post that
stood near.
2Jn regard to the ‘‘ Cribbage Hut,” Mr. Swayne tells me that the old tradition
of the neighbourhood is that the house so called was built on land “‘ cribbed”
for the purpose from the waste. To this Mr. Wyndham objects that rent was
always paid for it both in his father’s and late brother’s time, and that the
arable field adjoining, is called to this day ‘‘ Hut Field,” which he thinks would
scarcely be the case, if the Hut itself had been ‘‘cribbed” from the waste.
’ Mr. Charles Penruddocke, however, says, and here he is corroborated by Mr,
John Wyndham, that he always understood it was so called from the fact, that,
in the middie of the last century, the squires of Compton, Dinton, and Ferne,
together with Lord Arundell, were in the habit of occasionally meeting there,
ostensibly in connection with the formation of the Whitesheet Turnpike Trust,
when they would beguile the time by playing cribbage, and drinking a bowl of
punch! but in reality it was a meeting of kindred spirits of Jacobite tendencies,
where they could, without fear of interruption, drink to the king over the water
to their hearts’ content; and, together with the punch, discuss other matters
with which, as we know, the western squires wereconsiderably mixed up. Mr,
Penruddocke tells me that a traditional distich,
“They played their games
Without the dames,’’
which is still remembered in the neighbourhood, alluded to this practice of the
squires of old time. And Mr. Wyndham adds that he has often seen the old
china bowl and the ladle, the latter with a George II. guinea at the bottom of
By the Rev. A. C. Smith. $19
Cleverton, near Malmesbury? It may be that some of these are
perversions of the original titles: for it is amusing to see what
remarkable mistakes John Bull has sometimes made in regard to
sign-boards which he cannot comprehend.
Thus the famous old coaching inn, the “ Beld Savage,’ on Ludgate
Hill, well known to travellers of old times, with its sign of a savage
man painted under a bell, an emblem which it also bore on the
coaches connected with it, and which has often puzzled the curious
to decipher, was in reality only the “ Bell” inn; but kept by one
Savage, it gradually assumed the landlord’s name, and in course of
years the above device.
The “ Swan with two necks,” again, another coaching inn of great
renown in the last generation, with its strange and most unnatural
figure of two long elegant necks proceeding from the single body
of a graceful bird, was originally the “ Swan with two nicks,’ or
heraldic marks in the upper mandible, which the royal and all other
swan-herds were compelled to cut on the beaks of the cygnets, in
order to identify their respective owners’ property. But when the
custom of “ Swan-upping,” or “ Swan-hopping ” (as it was some-
times called) died out, the meaning of the word nick was forgotten,
and the “ Swan with two nicks”?—once the well-known swan-mark
of the Vintners’ company—became corrupted into the more in-
telligible, if incongruous, sign, of the ‘ Swan with two necks.”
— -‘The “ Bull and Mouth,’ again, another coaching inn equally well
known, and represented in its later days by the sign of a black bull
and a wide gaping mouth, carved over the gateway leading into its
yard, as well as on the panels of the coaches that started therefrom,
seemed equally inexplicable, until it was discovered to have been
it; and he has not the least doubt that this was the identical bowl which con-
tained the ingredients in which many a Jacobite toast was pledged.
Whether or no this is the true origin of the name ‘‘ Cribbage Hut,” we have
a very pretty episode of some of the most respected Wiltshire worthies of a
_ hundred years ago; and I feel grateful to Mr. Swayne for haying unearthed
the tradition, and to Messrs. Penruddocke and Wyndham for their letters on
the subject. I would also refer to vol. xiii., page 125 of this Magazine, in
_ testimony that among the Jacobite squires of South Wilts in the previous cen-
_ tury a meet of the hounds had not always for its main object the pursuit of the fox,
_ but was a specious opportunity for assembling to discuss more important matters.
‘VOL. XVII.—NO. LI. ae
820 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin.
originally the “ Boulogne Mouth” (or Harbour), which became a
popular sign with loyal publicans after the capture of that port by
Henry VIII., in 1544: but the French word easily sliding into
more intelligible English in the pronunciation of downright John
Bull, soon dropped out of sight altogether, and hence the curious
combination produced.
As another instance of a very similar corruption of the original
meaning of a sign-board, I would mention that near Hever Castle,
in Kent, where Henry VIII., wooed Ann Boleyn, there is an old
public-house sign which (I believe) still exists, at all events existed
very lately, exhibiting the well-known lineaments of bluff King Hal ;
but the population around for several generations, has always ealled
it the “ Bull and Butcher,” intending, no doubt, the Boleyn butcher !
Other strange combinations arising from similar corruptions, are
the “Pig and Whistle,’ under which ridiculous title one would
scarcely expect to recognize the Angel Gabriel’s salutation of the
Blessed Virgin: “ pige-washail,’ being no other than the Danish-
Saxon “ Virgin, all hail!”
Who again would suppose that in the “ Goat and Compasses”
might be found a corruption of the commonwealth sign of “ God
encompasses us”? a strange perversion indeed of a Puritanical
sentiment!
Who, in the English sign of the “ Quzer Door” would recognize
the old French sign of the Golden Heart (“ ceur d’or”’) ?
But stranger than all these was the transformation from a some-
what pretentious sign which was set up in Pimlico, representing the
1Mr. Nightingale has kindly reminded me that the sign of the *‘ Goat and
Compasses”? is found in Cologne Cathedral, engraved on a cask, as the trade-
mark of a Rhenish merchant, and adds: ‘‘ The presumption is that it was used
in England to indicate where a favorite Kbenish wine was sold.” It is true
there is at Cologne a flat stone, professing to be the ‘‘ Grabstein der Bruder und
Schwester eines Ehrbahren Wein und Fass Ampts, Anno 1693;” and the arms
exhibit a shield with a pair of compasses, an axe, and a dray or truck, with
goats for supporters. Possibly this may have given rise to our Englisch sign,
Others again have conjectured that the goat may have been the original sign,
to which mine host added his masonic emblem of the compasses, a practice of
frequent occurrence. (See Larwood and Hotten’s History of signboards, page
147.) I believe, however, there is good authority for the origin mentioned in
the text,
By the Rev. A. C. Smith. 321
: classical subject of a “ Satyr and Bacchanals,” the satyr being de-
_ picted after the usual manner with cloven feet, horned head and
tail. Of course such a figure was very soon mistaken for the arch-
fiend, and nothing was easier than to transfer Satyr into Satan : and
then “ Bacchanals” being a word of no meaning to the uneducated
mind, the nearest thing to it phonetically, which contained sense,
was “a bag of nails:” and so “ Satyr and Bachanals” became
“ Satan and Bag of Naiis:’? and when in course of time the sign-
board must be re-painted, and an ignorant painter was employed by
a still more ignorant landlord, the result of their joint performance
was the conventional representation of the arch-fiend, accompanied
with the seemingly incongruous symbol of a carpenter’s bag of nails!
_ After these instances of corruptions and reductions to ridiculous
issues, of what were once elaborate and somewhat distinguished signs,
I think we may readily allow that though to our unenlightened
minds whelly obscure, the incomprehensible signs I have enumerated
in this section, doubtless originated from some cause or causes,
sufficiently clear to their respective authors, though what those
causes were is beyond our ken. We will leave them in their mys-
tical obscurity.
. (7) From the undecipherable I pass on to “ Singular” sign-boards,
and of these our county has (I think) its fair share. Some of these
appear to have arisen solely from the caprice of an eccentric landlord,
who desired to set up an unusual sign: while others are almost as
inexplicable as those last enumerated, and defy the efforts of the
enquirer to unravel their origin.
_ Symbols of the on-vivant are almost monoplized by Salisbury ;
for that city boasts no less than three taverns charged respectively
_ with the signs of the “ Hawnch of Venison,” the “ Round of Beef,”
and the “ Shoulder of Mutton.” ‘The last may also be seen at
- Bromham; but nowhere else in the county do such epicurean sign-
boards occur; we have however the “ Jodly Butchers,” at Marlborough.
And then, to counteract its apparent penchant for meat, Salisbury
proclaims its temperance, for alone it boasts the sign of the “ Crys-
tal Fountain ;” while Swindon is content with simply the “ Foun-
tain:” but elsewhere we have the “John Barleycorn,” at East
; 2a
322 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin.
Grimstead ; the “ Grapes,” at Swindon; the “ Vine,” at Charlton ;
and the “ Three Tuns” (derived from the Brewers’ Arms), at
Wroughton, Trowbridge, and Great Bedwyn, though the Wiltshire
labourer will persist in calling it the “ Three Bottles,” mistaking
the diminutive barrels, which appear on the sign-board, for the
small wooden kegs, or “ dottles,” in which our mowers and reapers
delight.!
Excepting the Vine, the Grapes, and the Barleycorn, above-
mentioned, the vegetable world seems scarcely suited to the sign-
board; and yet we have several instances in the county of the
promotion of trees and shrubs to that honour. Perhaps some of
these signs may have been derived from notorious trees, which
marked the boundaries of parishes: for in the “ perambulations,” or
“beating of bounds” of parishes, which used to take place on
Rogation Days, prominent trees were oftentimes selected as dis-
tinguishing marks or boundaries: and under such trees a portion of
the Gospel was read, from which they were known as “ Gospel
trees,” and a certain number of boys of the parish were soundly
whipped, and then rewarded with money, in order to impress, as
vividly as possible, on their youthful minds the exact localities, so
that they could in after years bear testimony to the limits of their
parishes !
We have but one instance in this county of the world-renowned
“ Bush,’ which may be seen at Chiseldon. This however is a very
old tavern sign, and throughout the continent of Europe and the
United States of America, a dush (or the bough of a tree) hung
before the door denotes a house of refreshment; just as the old
Roman proverb that ‘‘ Good wine needs no bush ”’ has been translated
into every European language.
1T am informed by Mr. Hillier that five-and-twenty years ago an inn existed
between Old and New Swindon, kept by one Thomas Jonas, and bearing the
appropriate sign of the Whale. Beneath the figure of the marine monster, the
following lines were added, which prove that Mr. Jonas was a wit and a poet,
though not over refined in his language or his sentiments :—
*‘This is a true authentic whale!
Look at his head and regard his tail,
And then come in and taste my ale!
There is no better ale, I tell ’ee
Than Jonas draws from out his belly.’”’
By the Rev. A. C. Smith. 323
But we have also the “ Olive Branch,” at Devizes; the “ Peach
Tree,’ at Calne; the “Elm Tree,” at Devizes; and the “ London
Elm,’ at Swallowcliffe, near Salisbury. Of the “ Oak” we have an
instance at Westbury, and standing alone it seems to signify the
“ British Oak,” and is not to be confounded with the vast army of
“ Royal Oaks,” which have been considered in another category.
Other now singular, though once celebrated signs to be found
within the county, are the “ French Horn,” at Pewsey, once of
frequent occurrence throughout England, being in all probability a
corruption of the “ Bugle,” from the Bottlemakers’ Arms.!| Then
there is the “ Chequers,’ at Corsham and Box, one of the most
ancient of all devices, though the meaning of it is not accurately
known: it has been thought, however, to indicate that the landlord
was also a money-changer ; and a chequered board or “ Exchequer ”
(divided into squares like a chess-board, and coloured black and
white, red and white, or blue and white, upon which calculations
were made by means of counters), used to denote the money-changers’
office. Moreover we are not without our “ Saracen’s Head,” at
Salisbury and Highworth : a good old relic of Crusading memories,
wherein the terrible foe to the Christian was exaggerated into a
colossal size, and his head of enormous bulk bore the swarthiest of
faces, the most truculent eyes, and the fiercest of expressions. At
Bugley, near Warminster, the “ Blue Bali” occurs, a symbol seldom
met with in these days, but a favourite sign in the seventeenth
century, as we learn from the immortal Pepys. Then we have the
“ Red Rover,’ at West Wellow, doubtless derived from Cooper’s
famous novel, which took hold of the popular fancy to such an
extent, that it was adopted by many landlords as their emblem.
There is again the “ Athelstane Inn,” at Malmesbury, in commemo-
ration of the second founder of the Abbey. There is the “‘ Lion and
_ Fiddle,” at Hilperton, which I make no doubt to be a painter’s
blunder from some original “Cat and Fiddle,” which was a very
1Tt has been conjectured that these so-called Bugle horns on the Bottlemakers’
Arms were in reality drinking horns, which would have been more appropriate ;
but in truth a ‘“ Bugle” means any horn, being the old French word for wild
_ bull; and hence bugle horn, from the French beugler, to low, or bellow.
824 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin.
common sign in olden times, and is immortalized in the nursery
rhyme :—
‘‘ Heigh diddle diddle
The Cat and the Fiddle; ’”’
but which was in reality a perversion of “ Catharine la fidéle,” wif»
of the Russian Czar Peter the Great, who, with his Czarina, was
immensely popular amongst landlords after his visit to England, at
the end of the seventeenth century. Then we have the “ Hlephant
and Castle,” at Salisbury and Trowbridge, which was no other than
the crest of the Cutlers’ Company, who had adopted it in reference
to the ivory used in their trade. Again, we have the famous “ Five
Alls, at Marlborough and Chippenham, representing the king, the
bishop, the lawyer, the soldier, and the British farmer, with their
several mottoes: “I govern all;” “I pray for all;” “I plead for
all;” “TI fight for all;” “I pay for all: ” and it is amusing to
learn that this symbol on a tavern in London becoming almost
obliterated and requiring to be newly painted, the artist who under-
took to renew the sign-board, finding himself unequal to depict so
. many human figures, overcame the difficulty by substituting five
shoemakers’ awls, and inscribing it as the “ Five Awls! ”
But again, we have one sign of the “ Mermaid,” at Christian
Malford, which was also formerly a very favorite device ; two of the
equally favorite “ Zulbot,”’ at Mere, and Quemerford, near Calne ;
and one of the very old sign of the “ Windmill, at Collingbourne
Kingston.
(8) There are still a certain number of signs which have not
fallen under the heads of any of the above divisions, and which I class
together under the head of “ Miscedlaneous.”” Thus, the “ Patriotic ”
may comprise the “ British Ion,” at Devizes; the True Heart,” at
Bishopstone, near Shrivenham; the “ Patriot Arms,” at Chiseldon ;
and the “ Union,” at Swindon; the latter a very favorite sign at
one period of our history, originating with the union of Ireland with
England.
Then the “ Astronomical” will embrace the “ Suu,’ seven times
repeated ; the “ Rising Sun,” six times; the “ Star,” twice, and the
———————E—<— OC Ct
By the Rev. A. C. Smith. 325
“ Seven Stars,” three times; the latter very probably a masonic em-
blem. The well-known “ Drwid’s Head,’ on Salisbury Plain, seems
also to be attributed to a masonic brotherhood, rather than to any
special reverence for the sacred rites of the Ancient Britons.
The number “ Three ” again appears to have had great attractions —
in sign selecting : thus, in addition to the “ Zhree Tuns,’ spoken of
above, there are the “ Three Swans,’ at Salisbury; the “ Zhree
Cups,’ at Chippenham and Malmesbury ; the “‘ Ziree Magpies,” at
Marston Maizey ; the “ Three Lions,’ at Holt ; the “ Three Crowns,”
at Whaddon, Harnham, Devizes, and Brinkworth, the origin of
which some would refer to the three kings at Cologne, but of this I
confess myself sceptical. There are also the “ Three Horseshoes,”
seven times repeated in the county, but the latter may be readily ex-
plained, as they comprise the arms of the Farriers’ Company.
Of the sign-boards connected with the road and travelling on it,
upon which so much of the trade of our hostelries used to depend,
there are fewer emblems than might have been expected. We
have the ‘ Coach and Horses,” at Marlborough and Salisbury ; the
“ Waggon and Horses,’ at Devizes, Salisbury, Beckhampton, and
Wootton Bassett; and the “ Packhorse,’ at Warminster, Chippen-
ham, and Corsham. Add to this the “ Horse and Groom,” at Trow-
bridge, and Charlton, near Malmesbury; and the “ Horse and
Jockey,’ at Ashton Keynes, West Lavington, and Box; and I
believe we have exhausted all that appertain to this schedule.
(9) “ TheProsaic.”” With such a wealth of devices,enumerated in the
foregoing list,to choose from,consisting too of such a variety of subjects
to suit the taste of every individual, it seems not a little remarkable
howmany have, notwithstanding,descended to the most common-place
titles, and have contented themselves with prosaic senseless signs.
Thus what can be more dull and dreary than the title of the “ New
Inn,” a title which is more and more falsified every hour of its
existence? and yet this is the chosen name of no less than twenty-
nine of our Wiltshire hostelries; nay, if we add the new “ Bear,”
the new “ Crown,” the new “ George,” the new “ Red Lion,” &e., in
-contradistinction to the old, the number of these “ zew inns” is
increased by six, making a total of thirty-five, which nearly equals
326 The Tavern Signs of Wiltshire and their Origin.
the number of any other sign in the county; the favorite “ Bell ”
only amounting to a total of forty, and the “ Crown” but thirty-
nine.
Then we have “ Railway” Hotels, seven in number ; two “ Great
Western Railway” Hotels; and a “ Station” Hotel ; but I need
not pursue the question farther; for the New Inn appears to me to
be the very acme of dulness, the xe plus ultra of all that is common-
place, and to stand at the head of the stupid signs : indeed it betrays
a paucity of ideas, and an absence of taste, than which nothing can
be more hopeless.!
Here, then, I close my rough sketch of the sign-boards of our
Wiltshire taverns: it is but an outline; and if I have seemed on
any point to have generalized from insufficient data, and to have
jumped to too rapid a conclusion on too slender premises, I would
say, let such weak points be dropped out of sight altogether ; for
here (unlike the proverbial links of the chain) every particular case
stands solely upon its own pretensions, uninfluenced by the force or
weakness of its neighbour’s claims.
I conclude, then, with the expression of a hope that the older and
more interesting emblems may not be allowed to die out, and be
extinguished, even though the circumstances which gave rise to
them may have passed away, and been well-nigh forgotten: and I
venture to add an appeal to the influential landowners in our county,
that in cases of new signs being required for houses of public en-
tertainment on their property, they will think it not beneath their
notice to exercise some small amount of pressure, if only by means
of advice, to secure the adoption of such emblems, as (even if not
the most fitting for the particular locality) may at all events not
bring discredit, or a deserved charge of utter imbecility, on the in-
habitants of Wilts.
10n the day following that on which this paper was read before the Society,
at Warminster, the archeologists, in the excursion to Stourhead, halted at
Monkton Deverell, and here it was discovered that the village hostelry, now
denominated the ‘‘New Inn,” was once designated by the far less common-
place, if somewhat eccentric sign of ‘‘ The Tippling Philosopher” !
327
“Abury Motes.”
By Wittram Lone, Esq., M.A., F.S.A.
‘“ West Hay, Wrington,
‘‘¢ November 26th, 1877.
‘My Dear Mp. Smira,
‘‘ Since our visit to Abury the other day, I have been looking over
‘ Abury Illustrated,’ and amongst the Addenda and Notes appended to the
extra copies (after the Magazine was issued) there are two or three which I
think might, with advantage, be printed in the Society’s Periodical. I have
somewhat altered the wording of them, and I have added some remarks by
Dr. Thurnam on the Kennet Avenue and Sanctuary. As the’‘ vexed question’
of the Beckhampton Avenue has been pretty well threshed out in the
Society’s paper on ‘Abury’ (vol. 4), and in Canon Jackson’s ‘ Wiltshire
Collections,’ I have not returned to the subject, but have added a note on
Stukeley’s ‘ Dracontium,’
“T am,
“Very sincerely yours,
‘‘ WILLIAM Lone.”
Tur VaLLuM anp CENTRAL Circies at ABURY.
The general accuracy of Aubrey’s survey of the great circle and
vallum (plate ii., fig. 1.), made “ with a plain tables,” is confirmed
by the elaborate survey made by Mr. Crocker, for Sir R. C. Hoare,
one hundred and fifty years subsequently. This last, however,
deviates less from the circular form than that of Aubrey, whose
error in this particular attaches principally to the east quadrant.
Stukeley’s plan is an exact circle, and has no pretensions to be re-
garded as the result of a survey. In comparing the two plans of
Aubrey and Stukeley, our attention is next attracted by the very
much larger diameter which Aubrey gives to the remains of the
northern than to that of the southern circle. It must be supposed
that either these circles were put in from the eye only, or that by
some error Aubrey drew them to different scales. His accuracy in
this respect is impugned by Crocker’s survey, which is altogether in
328 «© Abury Notes.”
favor of Stukeley, who says that they are “of like form and di-
mensions.” On a visit to Abury, January 22nd, 1855, the writer,
in company with Dr. Thurnan, carefully inspected the remaining
stones of these circles, and the hollows in the turf which indicate
the position of several which have been long.since removed. By
this examination Stukeley’s accuracy was clearly established as to
the circular form, and similar, if not identical, diameter of the
northern and southern “circles.”? His estimate of the number of
' stones (thirty), composing each of the outer circles of these “tem-
ples,” appeared altogether probable. Of the inner circles, no traces
whatever, even of hellows in the turf, were to be seen. One stone
of each of these circles was all that remained in Stukeley’s days.
That of the northern was still standing at the time of Mr. Crocker’s
survey. ‘The existence, indeed of these circles rests almost entirely
on Dr. Stukeley’s testimony ; which, as he gives dates for the re-
moval of individual stones, cannot be set aside; and we think his
statement, as to their consisting of twelve stones each, must be
admitted as probable.! The distance of the inner from its larger
containing circle is shown by the position of the single stone in
Crocker’s plan; and it is clear, that to complete a circle at this
distance, the number of stones required would be twelve; the
diameter of the inner circle, as compared with that of the outer,
being in the proportion of four to ten, The slovenliness of Aubrey’s
survey, as to these circles, can hardly be too much regretted ; for,
bad he laid down with care the stones which remained in his day,
their original number and arrangement could scarcely now have been
open to doubt. In the centre of the northern temple Aubrey lays
down the three stones of the “ Cove,” all of which were standing in
his day, and gives a ground-plan and rude sketch of them, in the
corner of the paper on which his survey is delineated. This plan is
1J¢ may here be remarked as curious that in Stukeley’s ‘‘ Rude General
Sketch of the wonderful Relique of Antiquity at Abury, Wiltshire, as it ap-
peared to us, May 19th, 1719,” (Stukeley’s Commonplace Book, folio 1717-48,
lately in the possession of Sir William Tite,) the southern circle (of a somewhat
spiral form) is larger than the northern circle, and that there are no indications
in either of them of the inner circle of twelve stones which Stukeley subse-
quently held to haye been contained within each of these circles of thirty stones,
| By William Long, Esq., U.4., FP.8.A. 329
:
:
:
:
|
of much interest as being the only direct evidence as to the nature
of this cove, when complete. The most central of the stones in his
plan of the southern temple is probably intended for the large fallen
one, which, by Stukeley, was regarded as a central obelisk ; though,
that there was originally only a single stone in this situation, as
Stukeley supposes, and not a cove of three stunes as in the northern
temple, there is certainly no proof. The vallum has among the
villagers the popular name of the “ Wall-dyke.” It is generally
described (as in the text, p. 19, 1. 16) as having a flat ledge, twelve
feet wide, midway between the top of the mound and bottom of the
fosse. This ledge, however, only exists in the south-eastern portion
of the vallum, viz., between the entrance of the Kennet avenue and
that of the modern road to Rockley.
Tue Kennet AVENUE AND “ Sanctuary.”
The inaccuracies in Aubrey’s sketch (plate ii. fig 2), entitled by
him “The whole view of Aubury with the Walkes and the lesser
Temple appendant to it,’ are best explained by accepting it as a
“draught of it donne by memorie only.”
of the avenue appears to have been interrupted; and this interruption,
His more careful survey
he says, “hindered me from measuring it,’ and the survey seems
never to have been resumed. His sketch is probably too rectilinear,
and inaccurate therefore as regards the angle which it makes at West
Kennet, before ascending Overton Hill, to join the circles there,
called the “ Sanctuary.” “From Kynet,” he says, “it turnes with
a right angle eastward crossing the river and ascends up the hill to
another monument of the same kind.” Aubrey, who tells us he
“ writt upon the spott from the monuments themselves,” must here
indeed have “ writt,’’ as he says, “ as he rode a gallop; ” the state-
ment that the avenue crossed the river being at variance with his
own plan (perhaps we should read “crossed the road,” instead of
“crossed the river’”’). The angle must certainly have been very
w from a right angle. The stones which formed it near the village
West Kennet had many of them in Stukeley’s time been removed
and destroyed, as he himself tells us (p. 30). Notwithstanding
ese defects, Dr. Stukeley had clearly sufficient evidence for his
330 «© Abury Notes.”
statement that the avenue ‘‘ makes a mighty curve to the left” (i.e.,
the east, p. 31). This, in his “ Scenographic view” of the whole
temple,is represented as a very gradual curve, which, if produced to
an angle, would be a very obtuse one. Stukeley’s draught of this
avenue from Abury to Kennet, in the sketch book before mentioned,
is very like that given by Aubrey, and running in a straight line
to “ Kennett Town,’ would require as complete a right angle as
Aubrey’s to connect the avenue with the circles on Overton Hill.
Stukeley alludes to Aubrey’s description of this avenue, which had
been printed in Gibson’s Camden, and says of it, “he [Aubrey] did
not see that ’tis but one avenue from Aubury to Overton Hill,
having no apprehension of the double curve it makes.” It is, very
possibly, a copy of Aubrey’s own sketch of this avenue, made by
his friend, Edward Llwyd, to which Stukeley, at a subsequent page,
refers, when he says, “ he did not discern the curve of it,’”’ but “ has
drawn [it] as a straight line.’ An error, the reverse of that of
Aubrey, is found in Crocker’s plan, in 1812, in which the bold
curve of the avenue at Kennet is entirely overlooked, and its course
represented as a very slight curve, entirely on the east side of the
village, whereas it must have passed through its very centre. This
is clear enough from Stukeley’s description, and is even now con-
firmed by the large stone in the garden opposite the brewery, which
was buried there by Mr. Butler, who, with reason, believed it to
have formed part of the avenue, and who pointed out the situation
of a second stone in a hedge-bottom a little farther to the west. The
existence of these stones we may conclude was not known to Sir
Richard Hoare, or Mr. Crocker.!
1 With reference to these Kennet stones, which would, in great measure,
determine the character of the angular curve made at this part of the avenue,
I find the following among my Abury memoranda, The first is a communication
from Mr. W. Cunnington : ‘‘ The late Mr. Butler, of Kennet, a good antiquary,
and an early supporter of the ‘ Wiltshire Topographical Society,’ gave me, a
few months before his death, in 1873, the following information relating to the
Kennet Avenue. He remembered a stone which stood near Mr. Kemm’s house,
at West Kennet. When the road was altered some years ago, as this stone was
standing in the middle of the proposed route, it was thrown down, and buried
under the road, where it, no doubt, still exists. Further on, where there are
now two cottages, at the foot of Overton Hill, on the right-hand side of the road,
By William Long, Esq., M.A., F.8.A. 331
Aubrey’s description of the double circle on Overton Hill is
marked by his usual negligence and haste. In it are left blank
spaces for the name of the monument, and number of the stones,
which were never filled up. He evidently writes from memory,
without notes, as is proved by his words, “I doe well remember
there is a circular trench about this monument or temple,”—nothing
of which kind is shown on his plan (plate iii., fig 1), and the ex-
istence of which is denied by Stukeley (p. 32). Aubrey’s plan,
stood two stones, which he remembered were broken up by order of the road-
commissioners early in the present century. Mr. B. told me that while this
work of destruction was going on, two gentlemen from London, in a post chaise,
saw the men thus engaged. ‘They drew up and expressed their disapproval in
warm language; one of them winding up by telling the foreman that a man
who would undertake such work, ought not to die in his bed. The man’s name
was Shipway, he lived at Avebury; and, added Mr. B., the saying of the
gentleman was fulfilled, for the man hung himself.” The following letter from
‘Mr, Butler appears to have been addressed to Dr. Thurnam :—
** Kennet Brewery, near Marlborough, Wilts,
“¢ January 21st, 1858,
**Srr,—I am sorry you did not send in your man when you was here. Though I was very unwell,
I was not so much but I could have seen you, and J could have explained what I knew of the stone
[better] than I can on paper. I only know of one stone now on the Bath Road, and that lies a few
_ feet on the Marlborough side of the cottage which is nearly opposite Mrs. Kemm’s house. I do not
remember its being buried, but from what I have heard it must have been‘about 1807-8, or9. There
was a stone broke in the winter of 1824-5, on the north side of the road further on towards Marl-
borough, and which there is no doubt was one of the avenue. It had fallen and was buried by the
scraping of the road, and was broke to make the present foot-path, as partly buried in the bank on
the south side of the road is some of the stones which is believed to be a part of the avenue. I
know of no other stones round, except it is one I had buried in my garden, which from the sizes
- and situation, I believe must have been one of the avenue.
**T am, Sir,
** Your obedient Servant,
“‘ Gzores BUTLER.”®
In a memorandum in Dr. Thurnam’s handwriting, dated April 20th, 1860,
I find as follows: ‘‘Stone in Mr. Butler’s garden buried seven feet deep, about
two yards within door, and about thirty paces from edge of road opposite
easternmost window of Mr. B.’s house. A second stone was discovered in
_ burying a horse, three years ago, in a sort of paddock, close to garden to west.
This shown by charcoal and ashes such as left by old-fashioned destruction of
sarsens. The place of this about four times as far from road, and opposite to
end of west wall of Mr. Butler’s brewery and house. A third stone a little to
north, north-west, in bank of hedge in same field (once line of Kennet and
—— road, until early in the century.) This looked for in bank of hedge, but
not found. The sort of curve made by junction with two stones remaining of
avenue clearly seen. A stone opposite to Mrs. Kemm’s house in road below path
‘and another nearer to cottage very near in Marlborough road, as before described,”
332 * Abury Notes.”
however, of these concentric circles or “ sanctuary,” and of the
termination of the Kennet avenue, would at first sight appear to
have been carefully made on the spot, though apparently from eye,
aided only by measurements made by pacing. Even of this, how-
ever, we shall see reason to doubt. His enumeration of the stones
which formed the circles are given with great precision on the plan,
as fifteen in the inner, and twenty-two in the outer circle. In face
of so exact a statement it would have been natural to prefer Aubrey’s
account of these circles to that of Stukeley, written seventy years
later, when they were much dilapidated. Stukeley’s sketches were
made in 1723, and we learn from him, that though only about a
third of the stones were then in place, yet that “the vacancy of
every stone was most obvious, and the hollows still left fresh” (p.
31). Stukeley himself saw only about half the circles, but says he
had abundant testimony as to their condition when complete, sixteen
years previously. All this, however, shows that there was room for
doubt as to the actual number of stones, and that it would be
a question whether the express statement of the less careful Aubrey,
who had the entire monument before him, should or should not be
preferred to the computation of the laborious though speculative
Stukeley, who could only study its imperfect remains. That
Stukeley’s statement in this instance must be accepted rather than
Aubrey’s, is however apparent from an early notice of these circles
which is to be found in the curious work: “A Fool’s Bolt soon
shott' at Stonage,”’ which is evidently by an eyewitness, and must
have been written within a few years of Aubrey’s own description,
and is as follows: “On seven burrowes hill, 4 miles west of Marle-
burrow near London way, are 40 great stones sometimes standing,
but now lying in a large circle, inclosing an inner circle of 16 stones,
great stones, now lying also, testified to be an old British trophie
by the Anglo-British name thereof (viz.) Seaven Burrowes and by
those 7 huge burrowes very near it with fragments of men’s bones.”!
1This piece was printed by Hearne, with Langtoft’s Chronicle, in 1725,
These seven barrows appear to be the seofun beorgas of an Anglo-Saxon charter
of the tenth century, referring to Kennet. (Cod. Dip., No. 571.) Wilts Arch,
Mag., vi., 8327. In the “Fool’s Bolt” is a notice of a circle of stones near.
Marlborough, evidently that marked fig. 2, plate 3, of Mr, Long’s ‘‘ Abury,”.
By William Long, Hsq., U.A., F.S.A. 333
The numbers here given confirm Stukeley exactly as to the outer
circle, and Aubrey’s number, twenty-six, must, we think, be rejected
in favor of the complete number of forty. As to the inner circle,
there is less variation in the three accounts, Aubrey’s number being
. fifteen ; sixteen the number in the “ Fool’s Bolt ;”” and Stukeley’s,
eighteen ; between which it is impossible to decide, though we may
fairly give the preference to Stukeley. With the proofs before us
of Aubrey’s carelessness, it would be difficult to insist on the curious
manner in which, in his sketch, the avenue on Overton Hill is
narrowed and bent, as it approaches the circles of the sanctuary.
Ditaripations Descripep By THE Rev. C. Lucas.
- The Rev. Charles Lucas, Curate of Abury, and author of the poem
_referred to at p. 3861 of Wilts Magazine, vol. iv., thus speaks of the
dilapidations in the two avenues, which had come under his notice
before the publication of his book, in 1795. * “ The stones from the
_ neck (of the serpent) were taken by a Mr. Nalder, by order of the
landlord, Mr. Grubbe, to build the farm house, now Mr. Tanner’s ;
and most of the [West] Kennet houses are built from that part of
the avenue. In 1794 Mr. Tanner destroyed seven, eight, or nine,
and the only regular part, six or eight pair, are on the new-ploughed
lands (late downs) the property of Richard Jones, Esq., a minor.
“The Beckhampton avenue was also visible, thorgh not so perfect
as the other, in the memory of the late Mr. John Clements! (aged
eighty-one at the time of his death), who could clearly point it out.
This had been chiefly demolished by Farmer Griffin, and Richard
Fowler. The two stones in the cove® are all that now remain, and
with difficulty they were saved by applying from the farmer to the
landlord. Mr. John Brown is now the owner of this estate.”
and noticed by him in page 346, of vol. iv., Wilts Mag. Itis as follows: ‘* The
first was also called Manton, near Marlburrow from a pettie Stonage there of
eight huge stones, now called the broad stones, antiently standing, but now
lying circularly in London way, testified to be a British trophie, by the frag-
- ments of men’s bones found on the burrows on the fields adjoining.”
1 John Clements was a grocer in Abury and born in 1714. The two hundred
years, from John Aubrey’s early visits to the present time, are bridged over by
the lives of three persons residing at or near Abury, viz., ‘‘ Parson Brunsdon,”’
John Clements, and the Rey. Charles Lucas.
_ * The lesser and more northern of these stones did not belong to the cove.
334 « Abury Notes.”
Stukeley’s account of this latter avenue derives not unimportant
confirmation from these recollections of the “ ancient Clements,”
who probably in his boyhood was an eyewitness of Dr. Stukeley’s
surveys.
StukELEy’s “ Dracontium.”
It is probable that after the statements and plans of Twining,
Stukeley, and Lucas, with respect to the (so-called) Beckhampton
Avenue, there will always be persons disposed to believe in the ex-
istence of an avenue of stones on that side of Abury, although they
may not be in accord as to the distance to which it may have ex-
tended from the great circle in that direction.
Whatever views may be entertained in this respect by present or
future antiquaries, it is to be hoped that the Dracontian theory,
which Stukeley propounded, may be allowed to die out, never to be ©
revived. Sir Richard C. Hoare acquiesced in it in an unhesitating
and unenquiring spirit ; but Mr. Algernon Herbert rose against it,
and scouted it in no measured terms: ‘‘ Before these extravagances
[the connection of the name of Abury with Abiri] had been broached,
Dr. Stukeley had maintained that the avenue was a serpent, and the
terminal circle its head. That has been adopted for a fact; anti-
quaries now talk as freely of the serpent of Abury as of the sphinx
in Egypt; and until lately, I had slumbered in acquiescence to this
‘generally received, but gross deception” (p. 104). “ It was easy
for him to show, that all ages and religions had notions concerning
a serpent, but he felt that he made no progress by a parade of such
learning. All the world talked about serpents; but from the be-
ginning of the world to his days, no human being had ever heard
of a building laid out in the shape of a serpent. His ‘ Odews
Kegadn” in Beeotia had nothing to do with a serpent’s body, only
with his head; and it was no representation of his head, but a mark
of the spot where his head had been cut off. Paus.,ix.c. 19. It
was of small use to say that Apollo’s killing the serpent Python
signified ‘ Phut’s building an enormous serpentine temple,’ and that
Hercules healing a wound he had received, by the virtues of the —
herb dracunculus! can be understood no otherwise than that Hercules
1A species of Arum.
By William Long, Esq., M.4., F.S.A. 335
made a serpentine temple, for there are‘certain limits to the credulity
of mankind (p. 68, p. 75).
“Therefore Dr. Stukeley boldly asserted, that the snake- eirt
temple was a well-known thing, and ‘denominated of old time’ a
Dracontium. Mr. Twining had held the candle to him, when he
coined the word Cunetium for a wedge-shaped temple. ‘The temples
of old made in the form of a serpent were called, for that reason,
Dracontia.’ ‘ Dracontia was a name among the first learned nations,
for the very ancient sort of temples of which they could give no
account, nor well explain their meaning upon it. Strabo, xiv.’ (See
Abury, p. 9, p. 54, p. 55.) The last words seem inconsistent ; for
if they called it Dracontium for resembling a draco, they could per-
fectly well explain their meaning. These impudent fictions have
obtained an extraordinary currency. ‘ Hence (said Mr. W. Cooke)
were these temples called Dracontia.’’ (Patr. and Druid. Rel., p. 28.)
Sir R. Colt Hoare mentions ‘ ¢hat class called by the ancients Dra-
contia,’ as a notorious fact. Ane. N. Wilts, p. 67, p. 70. ‘Even
temples from their resemblance in form, assumed the title of
Dracontia.’. Mod. N. Wilts, II., p. 51. Mr. Bathurst Deane, in
Archeologia, xxv., has an essay on Dracontia, in which the common
learning of serpent-worship is brought up, and everything receives
from it a Dracontian colour. We hear of the god Ophel, alias
Apollo, and his ‘ Dracontic tripod ;’ we see ‘ defined the nature and
object of a Dracontium ;’ and we learn that dracon is derived from
derech on, avenue of the sun, although General de Penhouet ‘ does
not understand the term dracontium’ in that way. It is quite im-
material how he understood a term that hath no existence ; otherwise
I think the General is much in the right. :
© This oft-repeated name, Dracontium, is nowhere to be found.
It is unknown to Stephens and Facciolati. And ‘Strabo xiv’ has
not a word of allusion to any part of this topic. When we see the
assertion, upon which the whole case is made to hinge supported by
no reference except a false one, we can make sure that there is none
to produce. That name and the assertions concerning it were a
deliberate forgery which supine credulity has screened from detection
a hundred years ” (Cyclops Christianus, pp. 106-7),
VOL. XVII.—No. LI. 2B
336
On the Study of Anglo-Saxon and its Galue
to the Archwologist.
By the Rey. J. Baron, M.A., Rector of Upton Scudamore. —
>
(Read before the Society at Warminster, August 23rd, 1877.) ©
{/GNGLO-SAXON lore may be conveniently divided into four
al: divisions: Ist, charters; 2nd, laws; 3rd, poetry; 4th,
general prose. I will not attempt, on the present occasion, to dis-
cuss any one of these divisions, but I will first offer a few practical
hints on the study of Anglo-Saxon, and then pass on to give some
examples of its value to the archxologist, drawing my illustrations
chiefly from the localities and features of this neighbourhood.
As regards the study of Anglo-Saxon I am not one of those who
advocate its being introduced. into schools or into examinations.
Enough, if not too much, is required there already, and notwith-
standing the interest I have felt in Anglo-Saxon for many years, I
believe the Three Rs, with Latin, French, Greek, and, in some cases,
German, to be more important and valuable as educational studies,
although it would be much more reasonable to give young people an
initiation into the rudiments of their language in its earliest and
most grammatical stage, than to perplex them, as is now done even
in the case of young men going into the army, with Chaucer, Piers
Ploughman, and Spenser, which, without a previous knowledge of f
Anglo-Saxon, can only appear as transitional chaos, and confusion
worse confounded by a most formidable array of glossary and notes. _
Why should people generally be troubled with historical English, —
which ought to be a special study or an amusement rather than a
task? If archeologists and others desire to master historical English, —
they cannot profitably work backwards from their own day further $
than Shakspere and Bacon. If they wish to master earlier writers
and historical documents, they ought to go much further back, and
<
+
7:
4
or
¥
-
bow
*
On the Study of Anglo-Saxon 337
begin at the other end, as our great engineer Brunel did for the Box
tunnel, so that by magnificent engineering the workmen from the
two ends met exactly in the middle in a distance of three miles, and
as was afterwards done in the case of the Mont Cenis tunnel, so
that the French and Italian workmen shook hands in the middle
with scarcely the error of a foot in the seven miles.
Suppose then some archeologist desirous of prosecuting at leisure
moments this study, which I think very suitable and feasible for
mature life, or for any age, as a branch of archeology. How is he
to begin? I answer, not with charters, laws, or poetry, which are
too hard for a beginner and would be discouraging; nor even with
general prose; but with the Anglo-Saxon Gospels, and I would
recommend Mr. Thorpe’s neat and handy little edition. These are
pure easy prose, and the student would have the advantage of com-
parison with the noble and historic Latin of the Vulgate, from
which they were translated, and also with our own excellent au-
thorised translation, as well as with the Greek original. The
Hamiltonian system may not be good for boys learning Latin and
Greek at school, but I believe it to be very good for men cultivating
an acquaintance with their own language in its cradle.
After the gospels you can go on to the other parts of the Bible
which are extant in Saxon.!
You are probably aware that the Bible has an immense literary,
and, I think I may say, archeological value, independently of the
doctrines it contains, or which are alleged from it, and that it has
fulfilled a most important part in forming the English and the
German languages. As antiquaries we know nothing of the
religious difficulty.
- For grammar I would recommend Thorpe’s revised translation of
the Grammar of Erasmus Rask, the Dane, published by Triibner,
1 As a step to the gospels may be mentioned ‘*A Book for the Beginner in
_ Anglo-Saxon,” by Professor Earle, Oxford, 1877; and, for further advancement,
_ **Grein’s Anglo-Saxon Prose, First Part,’’ Cassel and Gottingen, 1872, contain-
ing the parts of the Pentateuch, of Joshua, Judges, and Job, extant in Anglo-
Saxon; ‘‘ Thorpe’s Analecta,” London, Smith, Elder, & Co,, 1846; ‘‘ Anglo-
axon Reader,” by H. Sweet, M.A., Oxford, 1876.
2B2
838 On the Study of Anglo-Saxon and
London. For dictionary I believe Dr. Bosworth’s (the Ainsworth
of Anglo-Saxon) to be the best for general use by Englishmen who
do not wish to spend much time on Anglo-Saxon. It gives com-
parisons with words in kindred languages, and also most useful
quotations and references. It has been out of print for many years,
and is very scarce as an old book, costing more than the published
price, which was two guineas. A new edition is expected to appear
shortly, from the Oxford Clarendon Press. In the meantime there
is a smaller compendious dictionary, by Dr. Bosworth, which I
believe is still in print, costing about eight shillings.
When you are fairly initiated you will be glad to refer to the
American philological grammar of Anglo-Saxon, by March, and to
the German works, Grimm’s Teutonic Grammars, the Lexicon of
Ettmiiller, and the Poetry and Glossary of Grein.
For commencement it is not necessary to master the so-called
Anglo-Saxon character, which is not really formidable, and is merely
the character which prevailed at the time, not only in England, but
in Ireland, and elsewhere. It is discarded with the exception of the
th and dé (the northern forms of the Greek Theta and Delta) in
Thorpe’s Anglo-Saxon Gospels, and in many other of the best recent
editions of Anglo-Saxon texts. It is of course necessary for reading
MSS., but is not nearly so difficult as the various forms of court-
hand which must be mastered by every antiquary and lawyer who
wishes to read for himself any English manuscript from the Conquest
to the Reformation. Pronunciation is, to some extent, important,
and is best attended to at the first beginning of the study, but it is
not necessary that the student should make any formal entry into
the world of phonetics.
A very few hints are sufficient. It would be an absurd anach-
ronism, and would only lead to confusion, to attempt to carry back
into Anglo-Saxon the present English pronunciation. The vowels,
with the exception of 0, ought not to be sounded in imitation of
their present English names: a2, ee, ei, 0, ew; but more in what I
would call continental, cosmopolitan, or archeological fashion, viz:
ah, eh, ee, 0, 00. C and g ought always to be sounded hard. In ~
fact the pronunciation should be very much like that advocated as
its Value to the Archaeologist. 339
the true and ancient pronunciation of Latin, at the end of the
Public School Latin Grammar, and which I trust is making progress.
It should always be remembered that in the Anglo-Saxon period,
spelling, though variable, was much more phonetic than in recent
English, and that when two vowels come together they ought to
be both sounded, if possible, so as to make a proper, and not an
improper diphthong, as English grammatists absurdly talk.
I will now give some examples of the special value of Anglo-
Saxon to the archzologist. One of the chief mementos we possess
of Anglo-Saxon times is the jewel of King Alfred, picked up im
the Isle of Athelney, in Somerset, and still preserved-in the Ash-
molean Museum, at Oxford; I have brought here this evening a
very beautiful and exact coloured drawing of it. It bears in archaic
and ornamental characters the inscription: “ Aelfred mec heht ge-
wyrean,” z.e., Alfred gave command to make me.
Professor Earle pointed out some years ago that the form of this
inscription marks it as belonging to the time of King Alfred, mec
being an Archaic form of me, the accusative of “ic,” I; and heht
being a reduplicated and archaic form of “het,” the past tense of
“hatan,” to command. We thus require Anglo-Saxon to read and
interpret the inscription, and critical Anglo-Saxon scholarship helps
us to understand how the archaic form of the inscription attests the
genuineness of King Alfred’s jewel.
In this neighbourhood we are all happily familiar with the Downs,
both name and thing, and probably our notion of Salisbury Plain is
very different from that formed by those who live at a distance, and
have never seen anything of it. We know that we have to go“ up
at hill a long ways,” as we say hereabouts, to get on the Downs;
that when we are there we find many ups and downs; and that even
coming off the Downs takes some time.
In illustration of this practical experience it seems interesting to
know that, in Anglo-Saxon, “dun” was one of the words for hill,
and that the history of our ordinary preposition, down, is off down,
adown, down.
In the account of the Deluge in Genesis vii., 20, the Anglo-
‘Saxon version, to express “ And the water was fifteen fathoms deep
340 On the Study of Anglo-Saxon and
over the highest hills” is “and thaet waeter waes fiftyne faethma
deop ofer tha hehstan duna.”’!
In the Anglo-Saxon gospels, the Mount of Olives is “ Olivetes
dun ” (S. Matt., xxiv., 3).
We have also in the Anglo-Saxon period plenty of examples of
the transitional forms “ ofdune” and “ adune.”
If we suppose the abstract notion of the word “dun,” which ex-
tends beyond the Teutonic languages, to be a wide spreading hill,
this may help to account for the sand-heaps between Calais and
Boulogne being called ‘“ Dunes,” and possibly the celebrated road-
stead off Deal in Kent may be called “The Downs” from “ dunes ”
submerged, or from downs still existing on the coast. We have not
in this immediate neighbourhood any celebrated dike so called, like
Wansdike on the other side of Devizes, or Grims Dike, but we have
at Battlesbury Camp some of the same sort of work, previous
possibly to Anglo-Saxon times, but Anglo-Saxon lore throws much
light on the mode of its performance. I expect many an Englishman
would be puzzled to explain the difference between dike and ditch.
The truth is that the Saxon verb “ dician,” the origin of our word
dig, meant to excavate, in the navvy sense of the word. What we
call digging, our forefathers in the Saxon period, and long after the
Conquest, called delving. In the Saxon gospels the unjust steward,
for “I cannot dig,” says: “ne maeg ie delfan.” S. Luke, xvi., 3.
In Piers Ploughman, for ditchers and diggers, we have “ diceres
and delveres;” and in the early days of King Richard II. the ery
of the Communist rabble led on by Wat Tyler, Jack Straw, John
Ball, and others, was :—
‘When Adam dalf and Eva span.
Where was then the gentleman?”
Mr. Kemble, in the very useful little glossary prefixed to the
third volume of his codex, explains clearly the history of these two
different forms of the same word. He says, “The eye measures
things differently from the understanding; it sees in the dike and
1“ Grein’s Anglo-Saxon Prose, First Part,” p. 38, Cassel and Gottingen,
Wigand, 1872.
-
es 2 pga Se
its Value to the Archeologist. 341
ditch two contemporaneous phenomena, the hole made by removing
the earth, and the corresponding rise or bank which results from
throwing it out. The language of literature has appropriated dike
to the latter, ditch to the former phenomenon.”
Hence, as Mr. Kemble afterwards suggests, ditch and dike became
the English equivalents of the fossa and val/wm of Roman fortification.
The language of King Alfred, in his translation or rather para-
phrase of Beda, Lib. 1, c. 12, curiously illustrates this process of
ditching and diking. After stating in chapter v. that Severus
fortified this island against the Piets and Seots, with a ditch and
earth wall “ mid dice and eorth wealle,” he goes on to describe how
the Romans, in taking their final farewell of Britain, advised the
Britons to build a stone wall, where the Emperor Severus long before
commanded to make a ditch and form an earth wall: “ thaer Severus
se Casere iu het dician and eorth weall gewyrean.” Observe, by
the way, that we have here “het gewyrcan,” the very same phrase
as on the jewel.
In a recent learned edition of Beda, by Rev. G. H. Moberly, a
son of the Bishop of Salisbury, it is shewn that Beda was here
probably misled by Orosius as to the place and nature of Severus’
fortification, but the historical question as to the locality does not
affect the value of the language of the Saxon paraphrast in illus-
trating the process of ditching and diking, in which the English
became so clever and industrious, that their country is more inter-
sected than any other with ditches, dikes, and hedges, and they have
proved themselves the best navvies in the world in making canals,
roads, and railways. There is less room than ever in this busy
world for the mere idler, but there is as much need as ever not only
of the gentleman but of the prince and noble to legislate, to plan,
to direct, and to educate.
Before leaving the subject of the Downs, and their earth-works, I
should state that the linches, or linchets, which are seen on the sides
of the Downs, whether natural, whether they have grown,' or have been
1 Compare ‘‘ On Terraces or Lynchets,” by G. P. Serope, Esq., F.R.3., W alts
Mag., vol. xii., p. 185. Sir J. Lubbock, Bart., the president, upon the con-
clusion of Mr. Baron’s paper, said a few words in favour of Mr. Serope’s theory
of the formation of linchets.
342 On the Study of Anglo-Saxon and
made for the convenience of cultivation, or have resulted from the
exigences of ploughing, derive their name from the Anglo-Saxon
word “ Hline,” usually a balk in ploughing. The word frequently
occurs in Saxon charters, and sometimes in the later form “‘ Hlinch.”
To pass to another example of the value of Anglo-Saxon to the
archeologist.
The parish Church of Bishopstrow, the village two miles from
Warminster on the Salisbury road, is dedicated to St. Aldhelm, who,
after being Abbot of Malmesbury, in North Wilts, about thirty years,
became Bishop of Sherborn in 507, and died in the village Church of
Doulting, near Shepton Mallet, in A.D. 709. The Church of
Doulting, as also that of Broadway, Somerset, is dedicated to St.
Aldhelm, and he founded Churches at Frome Selwood, and Bradford-~
on-Avon.
Bishopstrow, to anyone accustomed to Saxon, clearly indicates
Bishop’s Tree, “ treow ” being the Saxon word for tree. In Domes-
day survey it is spelt Biscopestreu.
The ordinary biographies of St. Aldhelm state what a wonderful
scholar he was in Latin, Hebrew, music, &c., and how earnest and
successful he was in his ministrations, but they give no hint of his
connection with Bishopstrow. Some light is thrown on the subject
by a passage in a life from Capgrave, given at the end of the works
of St. Aldhelm, edited by Rev. Dr. Giles, Rector of Sutton, Surrey,
a native of Frome Selwood. But the fullest account is given by
William of Malmesbury, in his long biography of St. Aldhelm,
whom he specially venerated as the benefactor and Abbot of the
abbey to which he belonged. This life is only printed in Wharton’s
Anglia Sacra and in the Acta Sanctorum. I quote from the
Anglia Sacra, vol. i., pp. 23, 24:.!
I need scarcely remind the members of an archzological society
that it would be extremely unphilosophical to reject entirely the
statement of a medizval writer because he admits miraculous reports.
We must treat many of these miracles as Niebuhr treated the fables
of Livy, and extract what truth we can from them. The most
1 Compare ‘“‘ Life and Times of Aldhelm,” by Rey. W. H. Jones, F.S.A.,
Wilts Mag., vol. viii., p. 62, n. 2, and p. 72.
sO Rides aap ess tate
——
te
ats Value to the Archeologist. 343
absurd legends of miracles are often most valuable to the archeologist
in illustrating folk-lore and the current of thought prevailing at
the time.
After describing how Egwin, Bishop of Worcester, in consequence
of a vision, went with all haste to Doulting, and transported the
corpse of Bishop Aldhelm thence to Malmesbury Abbey for honourable
:
burial, placing stone crosses at every seven miles in the whole dis-
tance of fifty miles from Doulting to Malmesbury, the writer goes
on to say: “ All these crosses remain, nor has any one of them felt
the injury of age: and they are called Biscepstane, i.e., Lapides
Episcopi, and one of them is in full sight in the monk’s cloister,
and this admonishes that I should not pass over in silence what fame
currently reports concerning ‘ Bascepestrune.’ There is a village in
a valley to which he is said to have come to fulfil his desire of
preaching. That while he was discoursing to the people he had by
chance fixed in the earth the ashen staff upon which he was wont to
lean; that the staff in the meantime, by the power of God, grew
up to a wonderful size, enlivened with sap, clothed with bark, put-
ting forth tender leaves and beautiful boughs. That the Bishop,
who was intent upon the word, being admonished by the shout of
the people, looked behind him, and having adored the miracle of
God, left the staff there as a gift. That from the stock of the first
tree many ash trees sprang, so that, as I have said, that village is
commonly called, Ad Episcopi Arbores, Bishop’s Trees. These things
I have not asserted for certain, but I have not omitted them, lest I
_ should be found fault with for having passed them over.”
So far William of Malmesbury, who flourished A.D. 1140. Not-
withstanding the marvel mixed up with the narrative, it seems clear
that Bishop Aldhelm came on a missionary errand to the place after-
wards called Bishopstrow, which was then in his diocese. The see
of Salisbury was not constituted till many years afterwards. It
Was very natural that he should stick his long ashen walking-staff
in the ground while preaching, and possibly a tree may have been
planted to commemorate the spot, and other trees may have been
derived from it by propagation. Or the stick may be altogether a
myth, and it seems quite as probable that a tree or trees already
344 On the Study of Anglo-Saxon and
flourishing were connected with Bishop Aldhelm’s preaching visit
to the place afterwards called Bishopstrow. Compare the case of
St. Augustine’s Oak. Beda, Hist. Eccl. Lib. 11, 2.
The facts which seem clear from William of Malmsbury, not-
withstanding the miraculous part of the story, are that Bishop
Aldhelm made a preaching visit to the place in question, and that
in consequence of the connexion of some tree or trees with his visit
the place was called Bishopstrow. To these facts we are able to add
two others, that at this moment the village is called Bishopstrow,
and the Church is dedicated to St. Aldhelm.
In this neighbourhood we have a very pleasant place called Sheer-
water, which we are all permitted to enjoy from time to time by the
hereditary kindness of the noble owner, who has also recently cut down
some trees that all may have a view of its beauties as they pass along
the road towards Maiden Bradley. When] first heard the nameSheer-
water I thought it must be a fancy name adopted by some owner of the
estate who had a knowledge of Anglo-Saxon; but upon further en-
quiry I found it marked in Sir Richard Colt Hoare’s Wiltshire and
old maps as the name of the little stream which was dammed up to
form the ornamental lake, and the name is there spelt Shire Water.
Various and not unreasonable interpretations have been suggested
as to the meaning of the name; some believe that it had something
to do with the shire or county. This appears to me a most round-
about conjecture. That because a little stream runs into the Deverill,
and the Deverill into the Wily, and the Wily runs past Wilton—
which is believed in late Saxon times to have given the name of
Wiltshire to the county—that therefore the original little stream
should be called shire or county water. Others again say, it was
so called because there was a sheep-washing and sheep-shearing
place connected with it. My experience of a sheep-farming district 4
tempts me to remark that water is used, not for shearing, but for
washing sheep, and the processes are usually distinct in time and
place. Sheep are not usually washed and shorn “there right,” as ~
we say in Wilts, but are driven home after washing, and the shearing
is deferred till the wool is fairly dry and the sheep have a little —
recovered from the shock to their nerves caused by the preliminary
—
at ~ hein el ae
ee
— .
its Value to the Archeologist. 345
process. There is sometimes an interval of three weeks between
sheep-washing and sheep-shearing.
Mr. Cruse, the eminent surveyor of this town, among others,
has always maintained that Sheerwater means pure clear water,
and Anglo-Saxon lore abundantly confirms this opinion. In
Bosworth’s Dictionary we find the meaning of scir (pronounced
skeer) to be sheer, pure, clear, white, bright; and it is commonly
used in Saxon as an epithet of water. So in the Saxon Chronicle,
A.D. 656, we have, in the description of some boundaries, these
words: “ And fra Graeteros thurh an seyr waeter Bradan ae hatte,”
“and from Great Cross through a clear water called Bradan ae,” 1.€.,
Broadwater.
The Collocation of the same adjective and substantive occurs in
the spirited poem, “ The Battle of Maldon, or the Death of Byrt-
noth.” The poet is describing the wild rush of the Danes when
challenged by the Saxons from the other side of the river Pant, in
Essex, afterwards called the Blackwater. I will give the modern
English first, in order that all may be the better able to follow the
Saxon :—
‘s Rushed the slaughter-wolves,
For water they recked not.
Of pirates the host,
West over Panta,
Over sheer water
Their shields they poised ;
Seamen to land
Their bucklers bore.”
‘¢ Woden tha Wael-Wulfas,
for Waetere ne murnon.
Wicinga Werod,
West ofer Pantan,
ofer Scir Waeter
Scildas Wegon,
Lidmen to Lande
Linde baeron.” *
- The like use of sheer as a special epithet of water is found both
in Spenser and Shakspere :—
_ 1 Cf Saxon Chronicle, ed. Thorpe, vol. 1, p. 52, note, and vol. ii., p. 27, note.
ie ** Grein’s Anglo-Saxon Poetry, First Part,” p. 356. ‘Cf Thorpe Analecta, Anglo-Saxonica,”
p. 134. Sweet’s ‘‘ Anglo-Saxon Reader,” p, 136,
346 On the Study of Anglo-Saxon.
“JT fonder, then Cephisus foolish child
Who having vewed in a fountain shere
His face, was with the love thereof beguild ;
I fonder love a shade, the body farre exild.”
Spenser, Fuerte Queene, iii., 2, 44.
‘Thou sheer, immaculate and silver fountain.”
Shakspere, K. Ric. IL, y. 3.
It may be well to say a word or two on the varieties of spelling
the name of this beautiful little lake. Shirewater, the eighteenth
century spelling, is Saxonie and historical, but if this were generally
adopted, it is to be feared that people would get into the way of
pronouncing the name Sheirwater which happily has never hitherto
been usual,
Sherewater appears reasonable, picturesque, and Spenserian, but it
has not hitherto been prevalent. .
Sheerwater has, I believe, met with some favour, and has the
recommendation, if the pure and dright interpretation be admitted,
of consistency with our present spelling of the word sheer which
is still used, though much specialised and degraded, eg., sheer
argument, force, steel, folly, impudence.
Shearwater which does not agree so well with the pure bright
theory as the other three varieties of spelling, has, I regret to say,
become common of late and naturally finds favour with those who
hold the sheep-shearing theory.
It is worthy of note that on the other side of Longleat on the
road from Warminster to Frome, is a cluster of houses called
Whitbourne clearly deriving its name from the bright, sparkling
bourne or stream which runs beside the road and issues from the
same water-shed as Sheerwater, “hwit” inAnglo-Saxon, meaning
not always dead white, but more usually bright, shining, glittering.
The brightness and clearness of the water of Sheerwater is most
strikingly seen in the pool and outlet of Spring-head, which mainly
supplies the lake.
Whatever may be your verdict upon the evidence I have brought
before you I am sure you will all agree with me in the wish that
the house of Longleat may continue to flourish as long as the bright
streams of Sheerwater and Whitbourne continue to flow.
347
Architectural Alotes
On soME oF THE BUILDINGS VISITED BY THE SOCIETY, DURING THE
LATE WARMINSTER Mzetine, AuGust 22ND, 23RD, AND 247TH, 1877.
By C. H. Tatzor, Esa.
G =2HE following notes do not pretend in any case to be an
Z¥S exhaustive account of the buildings noticed, but I have
thought it better to put on record, though in an imperfect form, the
considerations that suggested themselves to me when I visited the
spots, whilst they are still comparatively fresh in my memory, than
to delay them further with a view of producing a more complete
account at a later date.
In Warminster itself the old buildings are not of great interest.
The Parish Church is of a good size, cruciform, and with a central
tower. The transepts and the greater part of the tower are of the
fourteenth century, Decorated work. The tower arches are massive.
The only original Decorated window that remains is in the north
wall of the north transept. It is late in the style, of three lights,
with ogee heads to them. ‘The transepts are much modernised, but
retain their original arches of communication with the aisles of the
nave. That in the south transept gives an interesting example of a
female headdress, on a corbel. In the same transept a Decorated
piscina remains in the south wall. The chancel retains a Perpen-
dicular roof, plastered over. On the south side of the chancel is a
Perpendicular Lady Chapel! which has been a good deal modernised.
The corbels that supported its original roof remain, but the present
roof is modern. This Lady Chapel communicates by a panelled
arch with the south transept.
The upper and lower doors of the staircase to the rood-loft remain
in the north transept, by the north-east angle of the tower. In the
same transept is a gallery, with an elaborately carved front under
1Said to have been built by the Mauduit family, in the time of Henry VII,
348 Architectural Notes of the Warminster Meeting.
the tower arch, and the date 1660. Some of the beams that support
it are older, with Perpendicular mouldings, and may perhaps have
formerly belonged to the rood-loft. There is a brass to Elizabeth,
wife of Thomas Carter, 1649, and a plaster ceiling of the seventeenth
century, in the form of vaulting, under the tower.
This church has been greatly disfigured by the rebuilding of the —
nave, in 1724, on the old foundations, exclusive of its west wall and
those of the aisles, which have not been rebuilt, but. are the old
ones altered and spoiled. The new work of the nave would be en-
tirely out of character with any medieval building, and its windows
are extremely ugly. There are remains of the old pillars of the
former nave beneath some of the modern ones. They are, I believe,
of the fourteenth century. —
The church stands in a situation where it would lock well if
properly restored, but completely out of the town, and on that ac-
count inconvenient for the inhabitants.
St. Laurence’s Chapel! has been rebuilt, with the exception of
the tower, in a modern Decorated style of no particular interest. The
tower is old, of a late Decorated type, and much broader from north
to south than from east to west. The west door? is four-centred, and
there has been a pent-house in front of it, as is evident from the
corbels that remain. The lancet window over this door has no
doubt been altered to that form, and was probably previously cusped
like the window in the stage above. The uppermost story of the
tower is a Perpendicular addition, and the buttresses have mouldings of
that style and may have been added. ‘The position of this chapel is -
central,’ and from some points the tower has a picturesque appearance.
In a yard, on the premises of the Warminster Atheneum, is a
1 Originally built and endowed by a family of Hewitt, in the time of Edward
III. (see a paper ‘‘on Ancient Chapels, &c., in Co. Wilts,” by the Rev. Canon
Jackson, in this Magazine, vol. x., p. 314). The greater part of the tower may
have been built in that reign. .
2 It is stated in Murray’s Handbook that the initials of Henry VII. are over
this west door. I could not detect them, and should suppose the door to be
earlier than the reign of that king.
3]I add an ‘extract, put into modern spelling, from a ‘‘ Report of the Survey
of all Colleges, Chantries, &c.,” taken February 14th, 1511 (published by the
Rey. Mackenzie, E, C. Walcott, in this Magazine, vol. xii., p. 371), which is
Ss
a es be
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 349
earved stone slab of the fourteenth century, of good workmanship
and worthy of being drawn. It may probably have been the
front of an altar-tomb.' It is panelled, and bears three shields of
arms and two helmets with crests, in good preservation. It was
found, in two pieces, in pulling down a building on this site, in
which it had been used as old material, and is now built into the
face of a wall for preservation.
The excursion of August 23rd took the Members first to Long-
bridge? Deverel. On approaching the church, from Warminster, a
fragment of an old wall appears on the left, close to the road, which
is said to have belonged to the former manor house, which stood
near the church and to the north-west of it.
Longbridge Deverel Church consists of a nave with aisles, a
western tower, and a chancel with aisles or chapels. The oldest part
is the north arcade of the nave which is Norman, having square
piers and round arches. The font also is Norman with some rather
good ¢ carving. The south arcade of the nave appears to be of the
curious as 1s showing that the grievance due to the distant situation of the parish
church was felt even before that time. ‘* There is a Chapel called St. Laurence
Chapel, standing in the middle of the town, wherein the inhabitants found a
priest to sing for the ease of them, because the parish church [is] a quarter of
a mile out of the town, and converted all the lands atore-written in Warminster to
that purpose, and bear the rest of his wages of their own purses.” Ibid, p. 383.
1 The Rev. J. Baron suggests as a possible explanation of this work, subject
to correction by further research, that it may have been carved by a foreigner,
or other person ignorant of English heraldry, between 1327 and 1387, and that
the carvings, in the five panels into which the slab is divided, may be intended
to represent—in the central panel, probably the coat of the deceased commemo-~
rated by the tomb (on a chevron, between three leopards’ faces, three mullets)
—in the panel to the left of this, a coat intended apparently for the lions of
England, but wrongly carved, two above one, and passant to the sinister side
of the shield—in the panel on the extreme left, the cap and crest of Edward
IlI., a lion gardant but not crowned, with small obliterated shield placed
obliquely beneath the cap—in the panel immediately to the right of the central
panel, the four lions rampant of Queen Philippa, of Hainault—and in the panel
on _the extreme right, a cap with lion’s head as crest, with small obliterated
shield placed obliquely as on the leit.
- 2 Said to derive its name from a bridge, supposed to have been built by the
Abbots of Glastonbury. More probably, it may mean the long town. I have
adopted the spelling Deverel, instead of the more usual Deverill, following the
Rey. Canon Jones, in his ‘‘ Domesday for Wiltshire,” and this Magazine, vol.
xiy., p. 162,
350 Architectural Notes of the Warminster Meeting.
fourteenth century, and consists of perfectly plain arches, continued
down to the ground without capitals or bases. The tower also is
principally of the fourteenth century, and some small lancet windows
seen externally in its walls are of that date. Its upper story is of
the fifteenth century, and a Perpendicular west window has been in-
serted. The church has been most extensively restored as a Decorated
building, and has a clerestory with lancet windows. The north
aisle is Perpendicular. The arches opening from the aisles of the
nave into those of the chancel appear to be early, and altered in the
Perpendicular period. There is a monument, in the north chancel
aisle, commemorating Sir John Thynne, the founder of Longleat, who
died in 1580, but the monument appears to be much later than that
date. The stone slab, which is in use in this church as the altar-
table, is actually the old altar-slab, which was found in the chancel,
near the altar, when the church was restored, but the five crosses
upon it have been re-cut and the stone itself dressed over, so that it
has lost its archeological interest. A piece of fresh stone has been
added to make it wider. The carved seats ‘ in this church are good
examples of the last century. There is, some little way south of
the church, a picturesque block of three almshouses of the seventeenth
or eighteenth century.
Hill Deverel Church? is a modern building, of a most unsightly
description, but it contains the fine late altar-tomb of one of the
Ludlow family, with many armorial bearings; also some wooden
panels, with armorial bearings of Coker and Ludlow, which have
no doubt belonged to mural monuments of that material. To the
east of the church, there is a farm-house with rather picturesque
mullioned windows, but a modern and unsatisfactory front, which
was, I believe, the old manor house of the Ludlows.
Brixton Deverel Church has been much modernised by restoration.
The most interesting feature it contains is undoubtedly the chancel
arch, which is an example of transition from the Norman to the
Early English style. It has clustered shafts, with capitals and
1 There are similar seats in the Churches of Mere and Maiden Bradley.
2 It is stated in Murray’s Handbook (edition of 1869), p. 145, that this church
- possesses a rich screen.” If it ever was there, it is not there now.
By ©. H. Talbot, Esq. 351
bases and a hood-moulding of Early English character, but two
heavy circular mouldings in the arch itself, with the nail-head
ornament, which nearly resemble Norman. There is evidence that
there has been a low-side window, on the south side of the chancel.
The tower arch is a plain one, apparently of the fourteenth century,
but the piers on which it stands are square and rude, and I could
not determine their date. There is an arch in the west wall of the
tower, which has, I think, been a window-arch, and in that case the
ehurch was probably entered by a side door, and had no west door
when the tower was built. I take this window-arch and the tower
in general, which has small lancet windows on its north and south
sides, to be Decorated work of the fourteenth century. The spire
is modern, erected in 1852. A house, which is said to have been
the old manor house, almost touches the east end of the church.
At Monkton Deverel there is a fine shield of arms of one of the
Ludlow family, built into the front of a house in the street of the
village, near the church, having been removed from elsewhere. It
may be of the time of Elizabeth or James I. Underneath it is the
motto “ Ruina prementi—Subeuntibus umbra.”
Monkton Deverel Church has a Decorated western tower, with
modern Perpendicular tracery inserted in the old window-arch, and
a plain Norman font. The rest of the church has been rebuilt.
Some interesting carvings, probably of the seventeenth century,
have been worked into the pulpit.
Kingston Deverel Church has a tower, which is in its visible
features principally Decorated, with the upper part of the fifteenth
century and considerably restored. This tower is placed between the
nave and chancel of a church which never had transepts, and as such
‘an arrangement is not uncommon in Norman churches, and as there
undoubtedly was a Norman church on this site, it is presumed that
the walls of this tower are to a certain extent the Norman walls,
disguised by the builders of the fourteenth century. ~ There is, I
believe, no direct evidence of this: the tower may have been rebuilt
in the fourteenth century, retaining the original ground-plan, but
it is perhaps more probable that the walls of the Norman tower
were retained: it has now two Decorated arches, opening east and
VoL, XVII.—No. LI, zc
852 Architecturat Notes of the Warminster Meeting.
west. In the font, which is modern, are worked in the Purbeck
marble shafts of the old font, which show that it was one of those
which were supported by a central and four smaller shafts. The
only ancient part of the building that remains, besides the tower,
is a late Decorated arcade, of two arches, which opens from the nave
into a chapel on its south side. I understand that this chapel, before
the restoration, had Decorated windows with square heads. It is
now rebuilt is the same style with the rest of the church, which is
a handsome modern building of Decorated character, which however
in no way exemplifies what the ancient church may have been. In
the chancel there is a fine male effigy, of Early English character,
either of the time of John or Henry III. It was headless, and has
been “restored”’! by the addition of a new head, which archzologically
speaking is a pity.
Over the principal south door, within the porch, is a “ vesica
piscis,”? with a wreath of carved ornament, which latter, as it is
vouched for as ancient, can only be of the fourteenth century, as it
is profusely ornamented with the ball-flower. Otherwise, it has been
so cleaned that it might be supposed to be modern. The monogram
IHS, in the vesica, is of course of modern insertion, and I understand
that in this space there was previously evidence remaining of there
having been a figure.
The nave was probably aisleless until the addition of the Decorated
south chapel. In the pulpit are worked up some carved wooden
panels, of Flamboyant character, which are probably of foreign
workmanship.
Woodlands, near Mere, formerly a manor house of the Doddington
family, and now a farm house, is of great interest. The oldest part
is a building of two stories, to the north, the upper part of which
has been achapel. This building was originally of the fourteenth
1The feet also have been ‘restored,’ but I believe the original feet were
recovered since this was done, and have been preserved.
2 The Rector, the Rev.Preb. D. M.Clerk, informs me that thereis evidence of this
being a Norman *‘ vesica,” altered in the fourteenth century, which [ could not
have discovered without his information. If so, it is a very curious transtorm-
ation, and would be consistent with the builders recasting the character ct the
church in the style of their own day.
:
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 353
century. The upper story, or chapel, retains a square-headed Flow-
ing Decorated window, on the south side. The arch of the east
window appears of be also of the original Decorated work, but, at
a later date, Perpendicular tracery has been inserted. There is a
piscina remaining, of the original work, and two original arched
doorways, one’ in the middle of the north side, now walled up, which
must have been approached by an external staircase, of which no
trace remains, and the other, near the west end of the south side,
which is still in use, and is approached by a later staircase from the
dwelling house. On the north side, to the west of the door above-
mentioned, there is also a Perpendicular window, and the present
roof of the chapel is Perpendicular. It is, in short, a fourteenth
century building restored in the fifteenth century. At its west end
is an elaborate fireplace, probably of the time of James I., but a
good deal mutilated.
The room below the chapel has another fine fireplace, in the same
position, and a moulded plaster ceiling, both of the same date.
Now, externally, it may be seen that the chimnies are far older
than these fireplaces, being cylindrical, with moulded caps which
cannot be later than the fourteenth century. It follows, therefore,
that both the room below and the chapel? must have had fireplaces
from the first, and the insertion of the Jacobean fireplace in the
chapel does not of necessity imply that at that date it was turned to
secular uses, particularly as no other alteration seems to have been
made in it.
The hall is parallel to the chapel, to the south of it, and has
square-headed windows of two lights, and a porch with a room over,
all Perpendicular. A hip-knob, of carved foliage, on its east gable,
however, appears to be Decorated, perhaps preserved from an earlier
hall. The roof is, in one part, well exposed to view, and is of very
1 This, being the most easterly of the two doors, may perhaps have been the °
priest’s door, the other being for the lord. Possibly, also, the room under the
chapel may have been for the priest.
_ 2Three instances of fireplaces in the upper chambers of chapels, that were
divided by a floor into two stories in their west part, are given in Parker’s
“Domestic Architecture of the Middle Ages,” vul. iii., p. 178, viz., at Berkeley
Castle; Chibburn, Northumberland ; and Trecarrel House, Cornwall.
2c2
854 Architectural Notes of the Warminster Meeting.
fine Perpendicular work, the wind-braces being foliated, with cusps
tipped with carved foliage. There are some slight remains of the
screen, iz situ, and some good linen-panels, worked up in doors.
This old house is noticed and figured in Parker’s “ Domestic
Architecture of the Middle Ages,” but much more is remaining
than that author supposed, and the Flowing Decorated window, on
the north side of the chapel, is an integral part of the original
chapel, not copied, or removed from elsewhere, as he has stated.
Mere Church is of various dates, ranging from the thirteenth
to the fifteenth century. It has a very fine Perpendicular tower,
resembling in its general character that of St. Peter’s Church,
Marlborough, but richer. The nave is Perpendicular, with a fine
roof, and there is a remarkably fine rood-loft of the same style.
The aisles and porches, and the chapels on each side of the chancel,
are mainly Decorated. The oldest portions of the church are found
im the chancel, where, to the best-of my recollection, the angle-
buttresses are Early English, and other indications of the same date
are found on the south side. In the north wall there is a window,
later than these, but still of good early Geometrical character, which
appears to have been restored, and now simply forms an opening
between the chancel and its north chapel or aisle. The chancel has
a clerestory which is a late addition. There are some stalls in the
chancel, and on them is carved a shield, bearing “ three wolves
within a border,” the arms of “ Gilbert Kymer, Dean of Sarum
1449—63, and as such Rector of Mere.” * Aubrey says “ in the north
aisle is a kind of Balcony, as it were for an organ, on which these
coats are painted” (giving sketches). I will draw attention to one of
these devices later, but first consider the position of the gallery itself
which has disappeared. In the north arcade of the chancel, the arch
nearest the chancel arch has been carried up to a considerable height,
apparently by an alteration, in the fifteenth century, of the earlier
arcade. JI think it most likely that this is the site of the gallery or
“balcony” mentioned by Aubrey, and the more so as the only explana-
tion of this singular arch that suggested itself to me on the spot, before
1 Vol. ili., p. 332.
2 Jackson’s Aubrey, p. 386, note,
a
4 ieee
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 355
I noticed Aubrey’s words, was that there had been sucha gallery, It
was erected in the aisle, or chapel, north of the chancelyand the
arch was heightened to give it an opening to the latter. Probably,
it was for the organ,' the loft at the entrance to the chancel being
for the rood only. Amongst the devices painted, probably on the
front of this gallery, which are figured in the illustrations of Jackson’s
Aubrey, one® is a device of the Trinity, being a kind of rebus or
riddle. The principle on which this rebus is arranged, though it
has not in this case that exact form, may be described in words.
Three small circles are described at the angular points of a triangle,
in which, respectively, are inscribed the words “ Pater, Filius,
Spiritus Sanctus,” and the circles are then connected by bands,
bearing the words “non est.” A fourth circle is described at the
central point, or that which is equidistant from the three angular
points, and in it is inscribed the word ‘‘ Deus.” This circle is then
connected with each of the former by a band, bearing the word
“est.’ The rebus then reads “ Pater est Deus, Filius est Deus,
Spiritus Sanctus est Deus,” and “ Pater non est Filius, Filius non
est Spiritus Sanctus, Spiritus Sanctus non est Pater.” This iden-
tical rebus still remains, on a fire-place, in a building to be noticed
presently, recognisable by its form, but the legend that was on it has
been obliterated.
1 There was formerly an organ gallery, in a somewhat similar situation, in
Chippenham Church, which Aubrey saw still remaining. He describes it as
‘a very yood organ loft of free stone carved,” in the chancel, on the north side,
and says that the sexton remembered the organ standing there (see Jackson’s
Aubrey, p. 68). It had nothing, however, to do with the carved stone-work
over the vestry door, with which it is identified in the accompanying note, and
which was merely part of the decoration of the doorway. The true arrangement
became clear during the recent demolition of that part of the chancel wall. The
chancel of Chippenham Church had no north aisle, consequently the expedient
uséd at Mere cvuld not be adopted. The gallery must have projected into the
chancel, in front of a Perpendicular window at a high levelin the north wall, which
was no doubt introduced at the same time, and it was approached from the east
by a staircase in the thickness of the wall, which was found leading up to the
window-sill, and was totally distinct from the staircase to the rood-loft which
remained further west. These indications of the old arrangements haye been
swept away in the “ restoration” of Chippenham Church.
2 Plate xxxiy., No. 503,
356 Architectural Notes of the Warminster Meeting.
The chapel, on the south side of the chancel, was probably built
by John Bettesthorne whose chantry was founded there. The
chancel does not seem to have had any chapel adjoining it originally.
In this chapel is the fine brass of John Bettesthorne, 1398 ; another
fragmentary brass, representing a knight; and an altar-tomb. There
is a description of John Bettesthorne’s brass and chantry, in Kite’s
“Monumental Brasses of Wiltshire;”? also of the broken brass,?
which is assigned by that author to about the date 1430.
There is a medieval house, of Perpendicular character, to the south
of the churchyard, called the Chantry House; but I do not under-
stand that the house really was connected with any chantry. On
entering this house, by the original entrance, from the north side,
one observes, on the left hand, the doors that communicated with
the kitchen and buttery, to the east of the hall. It is evident that
a great part of the old building remains, and, very probably, the
original arrangement might be made out, by a careful examination.
The gate by which carriages enter may probably have been a regular
gate-house, of Perpendicular date, but, if so, it has been much
altered.
To the north of the churchyard, and some little way above it,
adjoining the high road, is a building, now a barn, but which has
formerly been a dwelling. It appears as if the greater part had
been a hall, open from the floor to the roof, which is a fine one, very
like the hall-roof at Woodlands. The east part has been originally
divided by a floor into two stories. The lower story has a wooden,
mullioned, eight-light window, in the north wall, which has formerly
had tracery.. There is a handsome fire-place on each floor. That
on the ground-floor bears, amongst its carved decorations, the
obliterated rebus of the Trinity that I have noticed above, on a
shield,> and the monograms I.H.S., X.P.S. The house is said to
1 Page 22, and Plate V.
* Ibid, p. 31, and Plate VIII.
3 There is a corresponding blank shield on which, not improbably, the arms
of the person for whom this building was erected may originally have been
painted.
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 357
have been a deanery, and the religious character of the ornaments
is so far in favour of that supposition, but not conclusive without
other evidence. The whole of the work is Perpendicular, and prob-
ably of one date.
There is, in the street of Mere, what it is comparatively rare to
find, a medizval shop,? of plain Perpendicular character.
In Zeals House there remains a very fine roof, of the same date
and class as in the two halls above noticed. The wind-braces, as at
Woodlands, are foliated, and the cusps tipped with carved foliage,
but this example is richer than the former, as the triangular spaces
included by the principals, purlins, and wind-braces, are also foliated,
which I do not remember to have seen in any other such roof.
Stourton Church is a small one, principally Perpendicular, in a
pretty situation. It retains a gable cross, of Early English character,
at the east end of the nave. There is an effigy of a lady, of the
fourteenth century, in the north aisle. It might easily be overlooked,
as it is enclosed in a sort of a box, by one of the windows, and can
only be seen by lifting the lid. The principal ornament of the
-ehureh is the fine monument of Edward, fifth Lord Stourton, and
his lady, Agnes Fauntleroy, 1535. It is an altar-tomb, with their
effigies upon it. The architectural features are of that mixed Gothic
and Renaissance character that came in in the reign of Henry VIII.
Very near the church, just within the grounds of Stourhead,
stands the old High Cross of Bristol, altered whilst it continued on
its original site, and, when it was taken down, removed to this spot
for preservation, but as it is not a local antiquity I do not give any
description of it here.
!T am informed by Mr. T. H. Baker, of Mere Down, that this barn, till within
the last ten or twelve years, continued to be church property. Together with
the yards adjoining it, and the farm house attached, it formed the homestead of
the Parsonaye Farm. This makes it extremely probable that it had been
originally the rectory house or deanery. This, together with other property in
Mere, was sold by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners and purchased by Miss
Chafyn Grove, of Zeals House.
2J think the name of the occupier is Maidment. Probably the finest specimens
of such shops remaining in England are those in the Butcher Row at Shrewsbury,
figured in Parker’s “ Domestic Architecture of the Middle Ages,” vol. iii., Part
i, p. 36,
:
358 Architectural Notes of the Warminster Meeting.
Maiden Bradley Church is one that has lost a good deal of interest
through being modernised. The greater part of the church is
Decorated, viz., the lower part of the tower, the south arcade of the
nave, and the chancel arch. One arch! of the north arcade is Deco-
rated, and the rest so concealed with modern plaster that its character
cannot be seen, but I suspect that on investigation it would prove
to be Norman. The only obviously Norman feature of the church
is the font, which is of Purbeck marble.
This was the last building visited by the Society, during the ex-
cursion of August 23rd. On the following day the members pro-
ceeded first to Longleat, of which well-known building I do not
propose to give a general description, but to suggest a line of enquiry
in connection with the history of the structure, which I do not
think has been suggested before. Tradition attributes the design of
Longleat to John of Padua, who was “ Deviser of his Majesty’s
buildings ” to Henry VIII., and the architect of old Somerset House.
The handsome external elevations of the building are generally sup-
posed to be his work, or at any rate executed after his designs. Now,
I happen to be familiar, in my own home, with a type of work which
is such as I believe we should have found in old Somerset House,
had any part of that building remained to the present time. ‘This
is the work executed for Sir William Sherington, when he converted
the buildings of the dissolved monastery of Lacock into a manor
house. Throughout this work an Italian element may be traced,
combined with the English architectural forms in a very remarkable
manner. In the case of two tables of carved stone, the design is so
entirely Italian, and the execution so excellent, as to lead decidedly
to the conclusion that an Italian architect or sculptor was employed.
I cannot of course assume that that architect was John of Padua,
though it is possible, for Sherington appears to have been about
the Courts of Henry VIII. and Edward VI., but he was certainly
an architect of the same school. Now, on my first visit to Longleat,
I was curious to see whether, in that building, which is reputed to
1 At the east end of the naye. I believe the explanation to be that the church
formerly had transepts.
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 359
be an example of the Italian Renaissance in the purity of its early
introduction, I could trace any analogy to the work of Sherington’s
architect at Lacock. On that occasion, my inspection was confined
to the exterior of the house, and to such parts of the interior as are
identical in style, and I failed to trace the slightest analogy ; but,
on the other hand, had I then seen the house for the first time,
-without any preconceived opinion, or knowing anything of its
_ traditional history, I should have set it down as not earlier than the
time of James I. It seemed difficult to believe that the author of
the design could be the same man who built Somerset House, in the
reign of Edward VI., for, if so, he must have altered his style greatly
in the interval.
However, on the occasion of the late visit of the Society to
Longleat, on reaching the leads, and gaining a view of the inner
courts, I at length found the analogy I was in search of. I first
noticed, inside the house, the occurrence of a peculiar square stop
to the chamfer, on the jambs of one of the doorways, which
occurs on all the doorways of Sherington’s work, with the
original hook for suspending the door, which showed me that I had
come to some work of the same class. The stop in question is, how-
ever, perhaps, a late Gothic rather than a Renaissance feature. Then,
emerging on to the leads, I found a great deal more of the same
: class of work remaining. The sections of the mouldings of the
___ windows seem to be identical with many of Sherington’s, and the
doors have similar cornices! over them. The majority, if not all, of
the numerous turrets are of this work, though some of them have
been altered. In general, they have doors opening on to the leads,
and one of them, of an octagonal form, and of which the upper room
has a window in each of the sides, and such a door of entrance, re-
yhinded me of the upper room? in the tower which Sherington built
1Tn one case there are two small stone spouts to carry off the water from the
top of this cornice, a contrivance of which there is no parallel example at Lacock.
? That is, the position of the rooms and the arrangement of the windows and
door are similar, but that in the turret at Longleat is much the smaller of the
two. That at Lacock contains one of the carved stone tables above alluded to,
and seems to have been intended as a kind of pavilion, commanding as it does
*a rather extensive view.
860 Architectural Notes of the Warminster Meeting.
at Lacock, “and which is only approachable from the leads. Others
of the turrets are finished with cupolas, of a decidedly Italian char-
acter, terminated with small figures of which one well-preserved
example remains. ‘These are of the original work. There have
been a series of gables, facing the court, and surmounted with the
figures of animals, of which some perfect examples remain, but the
majority have been altered and modernised. Every gable of Sher-
ington’s work at Lacock is so treated, and the carved animals, [
think, rather more delicately executed than these examples at Long-
leat. These gables, and their finials, I consider an English feature
in the work. Some of the original chimnies remain, on the inner
walls, next the courts; others have been altered, and others are
apparently rough copies. These are decidedly Italian’ in character,
and differ from Sherington’s which are fine examples of a late Gothie
type. It may be supposed that, biassed by a liking for the local
antiquities of my native place, I am imagining a resemblance in
small points, where no resemblance of any importance exists, but
the fact remains fhat, whilst I could see nothing in the external
elevations of the house that I could suppose the work of one who
had been an architect of the Renaissance in the time of Henry VIII.,
I see no difficulty at all in supposing that the features I have enu-
merated, in the internal elevations, were his work. I recognise
here the same kind of fusion of Italian and English elements as at
Lacock, but more of the Italian and less of the English. In the
external elevations, there are not, nor do I suppose that there ever
were, gables, and the only English features remaining are the
mullioned and transomed windows. I would submit then, as a
question worthy of enquiry, whether it is not the case that we have
the oldest part of Longleat in the walls which face the inner courts,
and whether the work of John of Padua is not to be sought there
if anywhere.
The external design is fine, though rather monotonous, and the
1 By this I do not mean to say that I am acquainted with similar chimnies in
Italy, but that the detail is decidedly Renaissance while the general appearance
is not Gothic. They seem certainly to be part of the original work, and have
the “echinus” ornament carved on them.
>
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 361
execution of the details very good. The ornamental crestiug of the
oriels appears to me inferior in its general design, and the execution
of its details, and these portions may have been completed later,
and by inferior hands. The great statues that occur at intervals on
the parapet are later. additions, and detract from the effect of the
building.
Of Horningsham Church, and an old house near it, I can say
‘nothing, not having visited that place with the other Members of
the Society.
In Sutton Veny the first building visited by the Society was the
new church, a very successful work by Mr. Pearson. It has a stone
vaulted chancel, and must rank amongst the finest churches in
Wilts. If our old churches must disappear, wholly, or as in this
instance in part, it reconciles one in a measure to the change to have
them replaced by something that is really worth a visit.
The Rectory house is of considerable interest, for its remains of
the fourteenth century, Decorated work. The walls and roof of the
hall remain, with some of its buttresses, and, at the back, one of
the windows, but despoiled of its tracery. The original door is still
the entrance, and on entering we fmd, on the right, the doors to the
kitchen and buttery. I understand also that, by the side of these
doors, remains were found of openings that had probably been
hatches. Some window tracery of the same date, Flowing Decorated,
has been found, and is now built into the face of the wall of some
offices for preservation.
The old Church of Sutton Veny has been partially taken down,
and the remainder left as a ruin, the chancel only being kept in
repair. In the north wall of the nave is a transition Norman door.
,The church was cruciform, with a central tower, but without aisles.
The tower piers are transition Norman, and the arches they support
have an Early English look, but may perhaps be of the same date.
On the tower piers occur ‘a number of small corbels, in the form of
Norman cushion capitals. The north wall of the chancel is Early
English, with lancet windows. The architectural features of the
rest of the nave and transepts are mainly Decorated.
The Parsonage Farm house, at Heytesbury, is a building whose
362 Architectural Notes of the Warminster Meeting.
exterior gives little promise of any antiquities within. However, on
the first floor, there are, in two rooms, the remains of a fine room of
the time of James I. The original room was even larger than the
two rooms, into which it is now divided, taken together. There is
a handsome ceiling of moulded plaster, and, from the abrupt manner
in which this ceiling terminates, it may be seen that the front wall
of the house has been actually set back, so that it is very fortunate
that what remains has been so well preserved. There is a fine carved
fireplace, bearing the arms of Moore of Heytesbury. Two original
doorways of this room, and, I think, the doors themselves remain.
The large Church! of Heytesbury is very interesting. It is
cruciform, with a central tower, and aisles both to nave and chancel.”
In the chancel we find work of two dates. The piers and responds
of the arcade are transitional from Norman to Early English, with
the exception of the west respond on the north side. This respond
is of one work with the tower piers ® and arches, of a very fine type
of Early English. It is evident that the arches of the arcades in
the chancel cannot be earlier than this respond, upon which one
of them rests, as they are all of the same character, and they, and
the elegant clerestory that rests on them, may be taken to be of
the same date as the tower piers. There is a large single lancet
window at the east end. The windows of the clerestory of the
chancel are small lancets.
The nave, at first sight, looks like an Early English one, with
Perpendicular alterations, but, on closer inspection, it will be found
that, though the general effect is that of an Early English building,
the mouldings are Decorated. The hood-moulding of the pier
arches is the ordinary scroll-moulding. The arcades * are fine, and
at the west ends of the aisles are circular windows, of which the
1 This church is I believe still collegiate, but will in time cease to be so.
? The chancel aisles which had been pulled down were rebuilt, and the arches
which had been walled up re-opened, at the late restoration.
8 Exclusive of course of a good deal of new work which has been introduced
into them. :
* The pillars of the naye have, I believe, been rebuilt.
By C. H. Talbot, Esq. 363
circular frame is original, with Decorated mouldings, but the in-
serted stone-work is modern, nor do I know that it is a restoration
of anything that existed there before.
Under the north tower arch, across the entrance to the north
transept,! stands a stone screen, with badges of the Hungerford
family carved on it. The transept contained a chantry chapel of
that family. There is a portion of a monument remaining in it,
also bearing devices of the Hungerfords, which, from the mixed
Gothic and Renaissance character of its ornament, appears to be
of the time of Henry VIII. Other fragments of the same
monument that were found here, when the church was restored,
were removed to Farleigh Castle, and are preserved in the chapel
there. There is a good Perpendicular window, in the east wall of
this transept, and, in the north wall, a very extraordinary modern
window, which I can only describe as a cross between Early English
and Perpendicular.
The nave exhibits a good deal of Perpendicular work, of a not
very interesting character, and the side windows of the aisles are
decidedly poor. I was told that they were a strict restoration, but
the design seems hardly good enough to be worth reproduction.
Possibly, limited funds may have prevented their being improved.
In the chancel Mr. Butterfield has imtroduced a good deal of
decoration, of the kind called “constructional polychrome.” Opinions
will differ as to whether this is pleasing or not, but we know, at any
rate, that nothing at all like it can have been there originally. The
walls, in the thirteenth century, were as a rule decorated with
painting, and decoration on the east wall of this chancel can never
yhave been carried so high before, as the roof-space was always hidden
by a ceiling, either at the base level of the triangle or a little above
_ it. For my own part, I should have preferred to have seen the old
walls unimproved, -
1 This transept had been converted into a family vault, and was thrown open
to the church at the restoration.
364
“The iltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
| , d
By W. W. Ravenattt, Esq., M.A.,
Tlonorary Secretary of the Wiltshire Society (founded 1817), &c.
ADDENDA.
WA following notes, giving further details of the services of
>,
6
the regiment in the Crimea, on the 8th June (Quarries),
and 8th September (Redan), 1855, were unfortunately omitted from
the last number of this Magazine.
On the evening of the 7th of June, 1855, an assault was made
from the advanced parallel of the right attack of the British lines
upon “The Quarries,” a series of rifle-pits in front of the Redan,
one of the main defences of Sevastopol. _ The attacking party
consisted of detachments from “the Light” and “ Second Divisions,”
and at night they were supported by the Sixty-Second Regiment.
The whole force was under the command of Colonel Shirley, Highty-
Eighth Regiment, Acting General Officer of the Trenches, assisted
by Colonel Tylden, R.E.
Lord Raglan writes: “The brave men who achieved this ad-
vantage with gallantry and determination, that does them infinite
honour, maintained themselves on the ground they had acquired,
notwithstanding that during the night and in the morning of
yesterday, the enemy made repeated attempts to drive them out,
each attempt ending in failure, although supported by large bodies
of troops and by heavy discharges of musketry and every species of
offensive missile. . . . Although nothing could be more spirited
than the attack of the Quarries, or more creditable to every officer
and man engaged in the operation, yet I cannot refrain from drawing
especial attention to the energy and determination which they all
displayed, in maintaining and establishing themselves after their first
success in them. They were repeatedly attacked during the night,
and again soon after daylight on the 8th, and it was in resisting
these repeated efforts on the part of the enemy, that a great portion —
of the heavy Joss the army has to deplore was sustained. The mode
in which Colonel Shirley conducted this very arduous service, and
carried out his orders entitles him to my highest commendation.”
“The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.” 365
And he does not forget “Colonel Tylden, ever indefatigable for
repulse or assault.”
“8th June. Sixty-Second Regiment. Killed. Major Dickson and Captain
Foster ; Colour-Serjeants Thomas Jones and Owen Pennell; Privates John Baily,
John Boylan, and John Quigly.
Wounded. Lt.-Col. Shearman, dangerously, since dead; Captain Ingall,
slightly; Drummer George Ware, slightly ; Privates John Fanelly, Patrick
Sullivan, William Newham, severely wounded; and Edmund Browne, Patrick
Crow'ey, Michael Dunne, John Doyle, John Halley, John Herbert, James
McIntyre, Thomas Rountree, James Turner, Owen O'Neill, John Richards,
Andrew Thompson, James Scott, slightly wounded.”
In his despatch of the 12th June, 1855, Lord Raglan again refers
to the same matter: “ Colonel Shirley likewise eulogises the conduct
of the Sixty-Second under Colonel Shearman; and here I must be
permitted to express my deep regret at the death of that officer, who
fell mortally wounded ; and of Major Dickson, of the same regiment,
who was unfortunately killed upon the occasion. Both these officers
are serious losses to Her Majesty’s service.”
On the 8th of September, 1855, the Sixty-Second Regiment
formed part of the force sent to assault the Redan. They were in
the Second Brigade of the Second Division of the Army, commanded
by Colonel Windham; General Markham being General of the
whole Division. The troops stormed the parapet and entered the
salient, but after a bloody contest were unable to retain it. The
Sixty-Second lost heavily then, and the volunteering of some of
them, to bring back the wounded from the trenches during the
following night, is specially mentioned.
London Gazette, 26th September, 1855:
“September 8th. Kiiled. Officers (2): Captain L. A. Cox, and Lieutenant
Blakeston; Men (21): Serjeants William Holmes, Matthew Garrett George
/Norman; Corporals John Bunn, John Lane, Joho White, John Cleary ;
Drummer Henry Traynr; Privates Thomas Allen, James Bell, John Bryant,
James Clarke, Samuel Costello, John Flynn, William Jordan, Robert Magness
Edward Murphy, Joseph Ritchins, Henry Strange, James Taggart, John Sandy.
Wounded. Officers: Lt.-Col. L. B. Tyler, and Lieutenant D ‘venport, severely;
Capt. E. H. Hunter and Lieut. W. Dring, slightly; Colour-Serjeant Joseph Young,
slightly; Serjeant James Newman, ditto; Serjeant William Newham. ditto ;
Serjeant John Hayter, severely; Corporal Francis Elliott, slightly ; Corporal
William Hill, ditto; Corporal Thomas Trollope, severely ; Corporal William
Smith, ditto ; Corporal William Corbett, slightly ; Corporal Francis Biddiseombe,
ditto. Privates wounded severely: William Gibbesson, John MeSharry, George
Fox, Edmund Aenessy, John Henly, Henry Short, John Robinson, James
Tarrant, William Cassidy, Thomas S, Kelly, Michael Higgins, Patrick Flynn,
—
366 “The Wiltshire Regiment for Wiltshire.”
Alfred Pole, Edward Power, John McCarthy, Solomon Slugg, John Lawler,
James Doherty, William Hume, Frederick Everrett, James Neill, Robert
Buchanan, James Darknell, Patrick Campbell, Patrick King, James Morissy,
Robert Dickson, John Russell, James Titball. Wounded slightly: John Dunne,
Patrick McGrain, James Webster, Joseph Jones, Jeremiah Sullivan, James
Mclutyre, James McGrath, John Dyson, Henry Pike, John I'wigg, Edwin Coles,’
Thomas Maguire, Edward Browne, Matthew Gorman, Simeon Hedley, John
Conroy, Patrick Lynch, James Kenny, Stephen Dunphy, Charles F. Mittenderf,
John Mitchen, Robert Hewett, James Perdue, Charles Mills, John Crossby,
Hezekiel Dixon, John Robinson, George Middleton, John Droyer, Patrick Kirby,
Jacob Terriss, John Day, James Frizzle, Maurice Sullivan, James Smith,
Missing, Sixty-Second Regiment. Lieut. H. A. Palmer ; Serjeant Cornelius
Young; Corporal Daniel Coleman; Privates William Dwyer, Michael Lough,
William McLeod, Joho Moore, John Doyle, Daniel Driscol, Hugh Caftrey,
George Reddick.”
General Simpson’s later despatch, (18th of September, 1855,)
gives the names of the following officers and men of the Sixty-
Second Regiment, as having been brought under his notice by
Lieutenant-General Markham for their services during the assault
on the Redan, and subsequently.
“Lt.-Col. Tyler, severely wounded; Major Daubeny; Captain Cox. killed ;
Lieutenant Blackiston, killed; Lieutenant Palmer, wounded and taken prisoner;
and Lieutenant Davenport, severely wounded; and the following eighteen
soldiers: Colour-Serjeants Joseph Young, Joseph Lyness; Serjeants Daniel
Loder, John Brady; Corporal Wiiliam Blackman; Privates Hugh Reilly,
Thomas Carnay, William Findlay, Denis Healey, Thomas Johnson, James
Farrell, Thomas Bacon, Thomas Berry, John Coughlin, James Lawes. The
above-named non-commisioned officers and privates volunteered to go from the
advanced trench, to bring wounded men in trom the front of the Redan, on the
night of the 8th instant.
Privates [homas Johnson, Bedford Chapman, William Freeman. These*three
men, also of the Sixty-Second Regiment, volunteered to bring in wounded men
from the front, in daylight, on the 8th of September, 1853.”
And the cup of honour was not yet full. Staff-Assistant-
Surgeon O’Callaghan, of the Sixty-Second, was omitted from these
lists till the 22nd October, 1855, when Major Daubeny draws at-
tention to his labours on this memorable day, not amongst his own
regiment only, but for others: “he accompanied the regiments as
far as the third parallel, and volunteered to remain behind after the
regiment was ordered back to camp, to assist in attending to, and
bringing in, the wounded from the front at dark. Many officers
have spoken in high terms of his conduct and exertions in behalf of
the wounded on that day; and requesting that his services may be
brought to the notice of the Commander-in-Chief.”
WILTSHIRE
Archwological and Batural Bistory Society.
Ist JANUARY, 1878.
Patron:
THE Most Honovrnasle THE Marquis or LANSDOWNE.
President :
Str Joun Luszocxr, Bart., M.P., F.R.S., D.C.L., &., &e.
Vice-Presidents :
The Most Hon. the Marquis of The Rey. Canon Jackson
Ailesbury Sir John Neeld, Bart.
Sir John Wither Awdry The Right Hon. Earl Nelson
William Blackmore, Esq. R. Parry Nisbet, Esq.
William Cunnington, Esq. Charles Penruddocke, Esq.
Gabriel Goldney, Esq., M.P. W. H. Poynder, Esq.
Trustees :
Sir John Wither Awdry, Kt. William Cunnington, Esq.
Sir Edmund Antrobus, Bart, The Rt. Hon. the Earl Nelson
Sir F. H. H. Bathurst, Bart, Charles Penruddocke, Esq.
Committee :
T. B. Anstie, Esq., Devizes Joseph Jackson, Esq., Devizes
Henry Brown, Esq., Blacklands Rey. Canon Jones, Bradford-on«
Park, Calne Avon
Robert Clark, Esq., Devizes H. E. Medlicott, Esq., Sandfield,
W. Hillier, Esq., Devizes Potterne
Rey. C. W. Hony, Bishops Cannings Alexander Meek, Esq., Devizes
Honorary General Secretaries :
The Rey. A. C. Smith, Yatesbury Rectory, Calne.
Charles H. Talbot, Esq., Lacock Abbey, Chippenham
E. T. Stevens, Esq., Salisbury.
Honorary General Curators.
Rey. H. A. Olivier, Poulshot Rectory.
Henry Cunnington, Esq., Devizes.
7.
ll LIST OF OFFICERS. .
Honorary Local Secretaries :
G. Alexander, Esq., Highworth | J. E. Nightingale, Esq., Wilton
H. E. Astley, Esq., Hungerford | J. Noyes, Esq., Chippenham
W. Forrester, Esq., Malmesbury The Rey. W. C. Plenderleath, Cher-
N. J. Highmore, Esq., M.D., Brad- hill
Sord-on-Avon The Rey. T. A. Preston, Marl-
H. Kinnier, Esq., Swindon borough
The Rev. G. S. Master, West Dean, | J. Farley Rutter, Esq., Mere
Salisbury J.R. Shopland, Esq., Purton
Alex. Mackay, Esq., Trowbridge H. J. F. Swayne, Esq., Wilton
W. F. Morgan, Esq., Warminster :
Treasurer:
F, A. 8. Locke, Esq.
Financial Secretary :
Mr. William Nott, 15, High Street, Devizes.
LIST OF SOCIETIES, &e., IN UNION WITH THE
Wiltshire Archeological and Aatural History Society,
For interchange of Publications, fe.
Society of Antiquaries of London.
Royal Historical and Archeological Association of Ireland.
Society of Antiquaries of Scotland.
Royal Archeological Institute.
Kent Archeological Society.
Somersetshire Archeological Society.
Oxford Architectural and Historical Society.
Belfast Naturalists’ Field Club.
Essex Archeological Society.
Professor L. Jewitt.
Bath Antiquarian and Natural History Field Club,
Dr. F, V. Hayden, United States Geologist,
Bristol Naturalists’ Society.
Watford Natural History Society.
Powysland Club.
£, .
. SAITTIA “AM ‘
‘Ruvjasoag pnrounuyy a ay { ‘TUVIO TuagOu 9
‘LLON WVITTIIM *y00I100 punoy puv sn fq pazipny
“S181 ‘pug qorvyy
0 8I 68E1F O 81 6881F
008 ‘0 ‘sedvjsog ‘sasuadxq Axpung “
0 8 2g st ereeee qoozyore S190 AV IN “
002 CUecce Saucve yriomuomn Sing f “ .
y &I ZII 5 °° sero ees stronmrad! ‘aspnig’ A “
a aa 4 tees we eweees qured roy pred ysvg “
a 6 cee ‘oy ‘sSuy
-se3 ‘y10MUOIT ‘Tepuey «yw
Z ¢ 9L Caer te eeeeee eorevncce Tlepuey ce
8 SI #8 “weeeees** cosvul-am03s ‘uomeg
$ 9 OF ******* gapring ‘sayin “gq “ay “
0 61 0¢ Mees eke iintiine os asOSUSH ra Mey 9 81 GOL Wnovoy [81009H 0} parrivo sour] eq |oy,
Z Olt “Trreesssssee* doarayy ysazaquy ‘“e 9 6L &8ZI © ots pepeao= cele pris crane
0 0 029: “"rr**s882°%9* Kanour eseyoind Aq = *4sT¢ *oaq se ‘suordrzosqns roy s}dteoe1 yseo OL "381g ‘aq
P Lf tar “LIST ps F "LL81
i: £0) "aq
PS Se cee ee ;
j “LLST ‘AMMWAOTA ase ox ‘LNQNOOOV IVNIa ;
va en OO ded
‘CNOT DONIGTIN“ Waasoaw $
WILTSHIRE ARCH AOLOGICAL AND NATURAL HISTORY SOCIETY.
Account of the Receipts and Disbursements of the Society, from the 1st January to the 3ist December, 1877,
both days inclusive.
[2g - > 6 ee ES a
DR. CR.
1877. RECEIPTS. £ 8. d. 1877. DISBURSEMENTS. £ os. d,
Jan. Ist, To Balance brought from last account....c..... 161 8 3 Dec, 3lst. By Cash, sundry payments, including Postage,
Dec. 31st. ,, Cash, Entrance Fees and Subscriptions re- Carriage, Advertising &c.........2.-06. 17 8 1
ceived from Members during the year .... ,, Ditto Printing and Stationery ..........-. 19 18 3
, Ditto received for Sale of Magazines .,...... » Ditto Printing New Rules .......++++e+6 516 6
3» Ditto ditto for ‘ Jackson’s Aubrey”
,, Ditto received for Admission to the Museum
», Ditto ditto Balance of proceeds of War-
minster Meeting
» Ditto Balance of printing and engraving,
&c., for Magazine No. 49...... 34 1 9
», Ditto ditto No, 50...... 57 3 3
»» Miscellaneous expenses at Museum 13 8 8
,, Attendance at ditto, 52weeks.... 18 4 0
», IMsurance ....+.eseececoeseeee 1 9 1
», Landand Property Tax ........ 1 9 0
et ALP 8
4) MO MBHARIONE SE, velar «Us aeinsdsas sceee sae 8 6
», Balance overpaid on Museum Account
transferred to this Account ............ 10518 6
pp Balance sesccseedaccaccccrcvecioseseree 12916 &
£425 111 £425 111
March 2nd, 1878.
Audited by us and found correct. WILLIAM NOTT,
ROBERT CLARK, :
W. HILLIER, \ Auditors.
ayy
7 ar oe
'
+
4
4
.
’
‘
«,
¢
saty
4,
rat
ka)
Os oe
¥ Seva
ey ete aE
eee
Spe wh veal ae gent
Live Music
Archive
Librivox
Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland
Museum of Art
Internet
Arcade
Console Living Room
Open Library
American
Libraries
TV News
Understanding
9/11